The Life of Granville
THE LIFE OF GRANVILLE
George Granville, afterwards Lord Lansdowne of Biddiford, in the county of Devon, was born in 1667. He was descended from the illustrious family of that name, seated for many ages in Devonshire and Cornwall, the founder of which was Richard de Granville, second son of Rollo, first Duke of Normandy, who accompanied William the Conqueror, in his expedition to England, and was rewarded for his services with the castle and lordship of Biddiford. Sir Richard Granville, his ancestor, served the Emperor Ferdinand against the Turks in 1566, and was present with Don John of Austria, at the famous battle of Lepanto, and on his return was made Vice-Admiral of England. He was slain near the Azores Islands; having in one ship alone sustained a fight for fifteen hours, against the whole naval power of Spain. Sir Bevil Granville, grandson to Sir Richard, raised considerable forces at his own expence for Charles I., and died in the King’s cause, at the battle of Lansdowne in 1643. John Granville, the eldest son of Sir Bevil, was intrusted by Monk with the most private transactions of the Restoration; and created Earl of Bath and Viscount Lansdowne, in 1661. His father, the honourable Bernard Granville, the second son of Sir Bevil, had, by a special warrant from Charles II. the rank of an Earl’s younger son, was one of the representatives for the borough of Liskeard in Cornwall, in the Parliament which met in 1661, and one of the Grooms of his Majesty’s Bed-chamber.
He received his early education under the tuition of Sir William Ellis, a man of letters, whose abilities afterwards recommended him to several public employments.
In 1667, the tenth year of his age, he was entered a nobleman in Trinity College, Cambridge, as appears from a copy of Latin verses on the Marriage of the Prince of Orange and the Lady Mary, in the “Cambridge Congratulations” of that year, signed Georgius Granville, Nobilis e Coll. Trin.
In 1679, before he was twelve years old, he pronounced a copy of his own verses to the Princess Mary d’Este of Modena, then Duchess of York, when she visited the University. He was admitted to the degree of Master of Arts, at thirteen, and left the University soon after.
It was probably about this time that he wrote the verses to the Earl of Peterborough, upon his accomplishment of the Duke of York’s marriage with the Princess of Modena, whose charms appear to have gained a strong prevalence over his imagination.
At the accession of King James, he again exerted his poetical powers, and addressed the new monarch in three short panegyrical pieces,[1] which were commended by Waller, whose praise excited in the young poet a rapture of acknowledgement,
In numbers such as Waller’s self might use.
However mistaken he might be in his zeal for that misguided Prince, or however enamoured of the Queen, he has left no reason for supposing that he approved either the imprudent piety of the Queen, or the violence with which the King’s religion was obtruded on the nation.
He had early imbibed principles of loyalty; and when the tyranny of James called the Prince of Orange to vindicate the liberties of Britain he thought it his duty to sacrifice his life for the interest of his Sovereign.
Without considering, or being then incapable of discovering the dangers to which the constitution was exposed by the violence of his proceedings, he wrote a letter to his father from Yorkshire, about a month before the Prince of Orange landed, expressing the most ardent desire to serve the King in person.[2]
“I cannot bear” says he, “living under the restraint of lying obscure and idle in a country retirement, when every man who has the least sense of honour should be preparing for the field.
“You may remember, with what reluctance I submitted to your commands upon Monmouth’s rebellion, when no importunity could prevail with you to permit me to leave the academy: I was too young to be hazarded; but give me leave to say, it is glorious at any age to die for one’s country, and the sooner the nobler the sacrifice.
“I am now older by three years. My uncle Bath was not so old, when he was left among the slain at the battle of Newbury, nor you yourself, when you made your escape from your tutors to join your brother at the defence of Scilly.
“You are pleased to say, it is yet doubtful if the Hollanders are rash enough to make such an attempt; but be that as it will, I beg leave to insist upon it, that I may be presented to his Majesty, as one whose utmost ambition it is to devote his life to his service, and my country’s, after the example of all my ancestors.
“The gentry assembled at York, to agree upon the choice of representatives for the county, have prepared an address, to assure his Majesty they are ready to sacrifice their lives and fortunes for him, upon this and all other occasions; but, at the same time, they humbly beseech him to give them such magistrates as may be agreeable to the laws of the land; for at present there is no authority to which they can legally submit.
“They have been beating up for volunteers at York and the towns adjacent, to supply the regiments at Hull; but no body will list. By what I can hear, every body wishes well to the King, but they would be glad his ministers were hanged.
“The winds continue so contrary, that no landing can be so soon as was apprehended; therefore I may hope, with your leave and assistance, to be in readiness before any action can begin.”
His biographers have not told us whether his father yielded to his importunities, or whether he was presented to the King; but if he really joined the army, it was without any danger to his person, for the Revolution was effected in England, without shedding one drop of blood.
Having no public employment, and possessed of but a contracted fortune, he lived in retirement, during the reign of King William, and devoted his attention to literary pursuits and amusements; the fruits of which appeared in his plays and poems, chiefly written within that period.
He is said, however, to have preserved himself, at this time, from disgrace and difficulties by œconomy, which he forgot or neglected in life more advanced, and in better fortune.
About this time he became enamoured of the Countess of Newburgh, whom he has celebrated with so much ardour by the name of Myra; though it is probable that most of the verses addressed to Myra, however disguised and seemingly applied, were originally designed for Mary d’Este of Modena, Queen-Consort of James; and it appears that he continued constant to his theme; for in his Progress of Beauty, written many years after, when she was no longer a Queen, he could not forbear placing her at the head of his celebrated beauties.
In 1690, he addressed a copy of verses to Mrs. Elizabeth Higgons, in answer to a very elegant poetical address sent him by that lady in his retirement.
In 1696, he brought on the stage at Lincoln’s-inn Fields, The She-Gallants, a comedy, which was acted with considerable applause. Though it is said, in the preface, to be “but the child of a child,” yet it contains an infinite deal of wit, fine satire, and great knowledge of mankind. He revised and improved this play at a maturer time of life, and printed it with the title of Once a Lover and always a Lover; but it is not free from grossness and indecency.
In 1698, his Heroic Love, or the Cruel Separation, a tragedy, was acted at Lincoln’s-inn Fields, with great applause. It is a mythological story upon the love of Agamemnon and Briseis. The prologue was written by Mr. St. John, afterwards Lord Bolingbroke, and the epilogue by his relation Mr. Bevil Higgons. It was praised in prose by the critics, and in verse by Dryden.
Auspicious poet, wert thou not my friend,
How could I envy, what I must commend:
But since ’tis Nature’s law, in love and wit,
That youth should reign, and with’ring age submit;
With less regret, those laurels I resign,
Which, dying on my brow, revive on thine.
In 1701, The Jew of Venice, a comedy, altered from Shakspeare’s “Merchant of Venice,” was acted at Lincoln’s-inn Fields with applause. The alterations are in some respects judicious; but, on the whole, rather lessen than improve the beauty and effect of the original. The character of Shylock, as Rowe remarks, is made comic, and we are prompted to laughter instead of detestation. In the second act is introduced a musical masque, called Peleus and Thetis. The profits were designed for Dryden, but upon that great poet’s death were given to his son.
At the accession of Queen Anne, having received a considerable addition to his fortune by the death of his father, and his uncle the Earl of Bath, he was chosen into Parliament, for Fowey in Cornwall.
In 1702, he engaged in a joint translation of the Orations of Demosthenes against Philip, and contributed a version of the Second Olynthian, to inflame the adherents of liberty against the French Monarch, which is still very much esteemed.
In 1706, he had his estate again augmented by an inheritance from his elder brother, Sir Bevil Granville, who, as he returned from his government of Barbadoes, died at sea.
The same year, his British Enchanters, or No Magic like Love, a dramatic poem, or as it was first called, a tragedy, was acted at the theatre in the Hay-market. It was written sometime before, and is justly esteemed the best of his dramatic performances. Its success was great; but was put a stop to by the division of the theatre and a prohibition of musical pieces. Addison wrote the epilogue.
He continued to serve in Parliament, and was successively chosen for Lestwithiel and Helston; and in 1710 was chosen knight of the shire for Cornwall; and, at the memorable change of the ministry that year, he was made Secretary at War in the place of Walpole.
In 1711, when the new ministry, apprehensive of the Peace of Utrecht being rejected in the House of Lords, advised the Queen to make twelve peers in a day, he was created Baron Lansdowne of Biddiford, in the county of Devon.
Though the prostitution of the royal prerogative to the violence of party, was regarded as an unprecedented and dangerous expedient, yet the promotion of Granville was justly remarked to be not invidious; because his personal merit was very conspicuous, and he was the heir of a family in which two peerages, that of the Earl of Bath, and Lord Granville of Potheridge, had lately become extinct. To this honour was added, soon after, the dedication of Pope’s “Windsor Forest|Windsor Forest.”
Being now high in the favour of the Queen, and in the confidence of the Tories, he was appointed Comptroller of the Household, and made a Privy Counsellor in 1712; and the next year, he was advanced to be Treasurer of the Household.
At the accession of King George, he was removed from his employment, which was given to the Earl of Cholmendeley, and his connection with the Tories prevented his being employed in that and the succeeding reign.
Having protested against the bill for attainting Ormond and Bolingbroke, he fell under the suspicion of plotting against the government, and was, after the insurrection in Scotland, seized, September 26, 1715, as a suspected man, and confined in the Tower, till February 8, 1717, when he was released, and restored to his seat in Parliament.
Being confined in the Tower, in the same room in which Walpole had been prisoner, and had left his name on the window, he wrote these lies under it:
Good unexpected, evil unforeseen,
Appear by turns, as Fortune shifts the scene,
Some rais’d aloft, come tumbling down again,
And fall so hard, they bound and rise again.
In 1719, he made a very ardent and animated speech against the repeal of the bill to prevent occasional conformity, which, though it was then printed, he has not inserted into his works.
In 1712, being embarrassed, as has been supposed, by his profusion, he went abroad, with the pretence of recovering his health, and resided several years on the continent, in a state of leisure and retirement.
During his residence abroad, he wrote A Vindication of General Monk, Duke of Albemarle, from some calumnies of Dr. Burnet, and some mistakes of Mr. Archdeacon Echard, in relation to the sale of Dunkirk and the Portugal Match, and A Vindication of Sir Richard Granville, General in the West for King Charles I., from the misrepresentations of the Earl of Clarendon and Mr. Archdeacon Echard, which were published at his return to England in 1732.
The defence of General Monk, and his relation, Sir Richard Granville, was answered civilly by Oldmixon in his “Reflexions, Historical and Political, &c.;” to which his Lordship replied in A Letter to the Author of Reflexions, Historical and Political, dated, Old Windsor, Aug. 22. 1732, which was followed by “Remarks, &c.” on that letter, by Thomas Burnet, Esq., the bishop’s son, written with equal candour and civility.
In 1733, he found a more formidable opponent in Dr. Colbatch of Trinity College, Cambridge, who undertook the vindication of Mr. Echard, which he executed with great vigour and judgment, but with too much asperity. He was more successful than either of his predecessors, and his Lordship very prudently declined an answer.
In 1732, he published a very beautiful and splendid edition of his works in 4 to., in which he omitted what he disapproved, and enlarged what seemed deficient.
He now appeared at Court, and was kindly received by Queen Caroline, to whom, and to the Princess Anne, he presented his works, with Verses on the blank leaves, with which he concluded his poetical labours.
He died at his house in Hanover Square, Jan. 30, 1735, in the 68th year of his age; having a few days before buried his wife, the Lady Anne Villiers, widow of Thomas Thynne, Esq. (father of Thomas, Lord Viscount Weymouth), and daughter of Edward Villiers, Earl of Jersey, by whom he had four daughters, Anne, Mary, Grace, and Elizabeth, but no son. His title of nobility is now enjoyed by that distinguished statesman, and illustrious ornament and patron of science and literature, the Marquis of Lansdowne, who married Sophia, daughter of the late Earl of Granville, the representative of the family of Bath and Lansdowne.
Granville’s works have been often printed both in 4 to., and in 12 mo.; besides which, there is in “Somers’s Tracts,” vol. iv., a Letter from a Nobleman abroad, to his Friend in England, 1722.
The character of Granville seems to have been amiable and respectable. His good-nature and politeness have been celebrated by Pope, and many other poets of the first eminence. The lustre of his rank, no doubt, procured him more incense than the force of his genius would otherwise have attracted; but he appears not to have been destitute of fine parts, which were, however, rather elegantly polished, than great in themselves.
There is perhaps nothing more interesting in his character, than the veneration he had for some, and the tenderness he had for all his family. Of the former, his historical performances afford some pleasing proofs; of the latter, there are extant two letters, one to his cousin the last Earl of Bath, and the other to his cousin Mr. Bevil Granville, on his entering into holy orders, written with a tenderness, a freedom, and an honesty, which render them invaluable.
The general character of his poetry, is elegance, sprightliness, and dignity. He is seldom tender, and very rarely sublime. In his smaller pieces he endeavours to be gay; in the larger to he great, of his airy and light productions the chief source is gallantry, and the chief defect a superabundance of sentiments and illustrations from mythology. He seldom fetches an amorous sentiment from the depth of science. His thoughts are such as a liberal conversation and large acquaintance with life would easily supply. His diction is chaste and elegant; and his versification, which he borrowed from Waller, is rather smooth than strong.
“Mr. Granville,” says Dr. Felton,[3] “is the poetical son of Waller. We observed with pleasure, similitude of wit in the difference of years, and with Granville do meet at once the fire of his father’s youth, and the judgment of his age. He hath rivalled him in his finest address, and is as happy as ever he was in raising modern compliments upon ancient story, and setting off the British valour and the English beauty with the old gods and goddesses!”
“Granville,” says Lord Orford,[4] “imitated Waller; but as that poet has been much excelled since, a faint copy of a faint master must strike still less. It was fortunate for his Lordship, that in an age when persecution raged so fiercely against luke-warm authors, he had an intimacy with the inquisitor-general; how else could such lines as this have escaped the Bathos?”
When thy gods
Enlighten thee to speak their dark decrees.
The estimate of his poetical character, as given by Dr. Johnson, is, in some respects, less favourable than the opinion of the general readers of poetry.
“Granville was a man illustrious by his birth, and therefore attracted notice; since he is by Pope styled “the polite” he must be supposed elegant in his manner, and generally loved; he was in times of contest and turbulence steady to his party, and obtained that esteem which is always conferred upon firmness and consistency. With these advantages, having learned the act of versifying, he declared himself a poet, and his claim to the laurel was allowed.
“But by a critic of a later generation, who takes up his book without any favourable prejudices, the praise already received will be thought sufficient; for his works do not show him to have had much comprehension from nature, or illumination from learning. He seems to have had no ambition above the imitation of Waller, of whom he has copied the faults, and very little more. He is for ever amusing himself with the puerilities of mythology; his King is Jupiter, who, if the Queen brings no children, has a barren Juno. The Queen is compounded of Juno, Monus, and Minerva. His Poem on the Duchess of Grafton’s law-suit, after having rattled a while with Juno and Pallas, Mars and Alcides, Cassiope, Niobe, and the Propétides, Hercules, Minos, and Rhadamanthus, at last concludes its folly with profaneness.
“His verses to Myra, which are most frequently mentioned, have little in them of either art or nature, of the sentiments of a lover, or the language of a poet; there may be found here and there a happier effort, but they are commonly feeble and unaffecting, or forced and extravagant.
“His little pieces are seldom either sprightly or elegant, either keen or weighty. They are trifles written by idleness, and published by vanity. But his prologues and epilogues have a just claim to praise.
“The Progress of Beauty seems one of his most elaborate pieces, and is not deficient in splendour and gaiety; but the merit of original thought is wanting. Its highest praise is the spirit with which he celebrates King James’s consort, when she was a queen no longer.
“The Essay on Unnatural Flights in Poetry is not inelegant nor injudicious, and has something of vigour beyond most of his other performances; his precepts are just, and his cautions proper; they are indeed not new, but in a didactic poem novelty is to be expected only in the ornaments and illustrations. His poetical precepts are accompanied with agreeable and instructive notes.
“The masque of Peleus and Thetis has here and there a pretty line, but it is not always melodious, and the conclusion is wretched.
“In his British Enchanter, he has bidden defiance to all chronology, by confounding the inconsistent manners of different ages; but the dialogue has often the air of Dryden’s rhyming tragedies; and the songs are lively, though not very correct. This is, I think, far the best of his works; for if it has many faults, it has likewise passages which are at least pretty, though they do not rise to any high degree of excellence.”
- ↑ “To the King; In the First Year of His Majesty’s Reign,” “To the King,” and “To the King.” (Wikisource contributor note)
- ↑ Whilst it has not been published individually, it is reprinted in full in Dr. Johnson’s discourse on Granville in The Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets. (Wikisource contributor note)
- ↑ In his Dissertation on Reading the Classics. (Wikisource contributor note)
- ↑ In his Catalogue of the Royal and Noble Authors, vol. 4. (Wikisource contributor note)
This work was published before January 1, 1929, and is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse