A History of the Four Georges, Volume IIMcCarthy, Justin
History
A History of the Four Georges, Volume II
McCarthy, Justin
Great Britain -- History -- 1714-1837; Great Britain -- Politics and government -- 1714-1837
We have said already in this history that a reader, in getting at an
estimate of the character of Lord Hervey, will have to strike a sort of
balance for himself between {6} the extravagant censure flung at him by
his enemies and the extravagant praise blown to him by his friends.
But we find no such occasion or opportunity for striking a balance in
the case of Lord Chesterfield. All the testimony goes the one way.
What do we hear of him? That he was dwarfish; that he was hideously
ugly; that he was all but deformed; that he was utterly unprincipled,
vain, false, treacherous, and cruel; that he had not the slightest
faith in the honor of men or the virtue of women; that he was silly
enough to believe himself, with all his personal defects, actually
irresistible to the most gifted and beautiful woman, and that he was
mendacious enough to proclaim himself the successful lover of women who
would not have given ear to his love-making for one moment. Yet we
cannot believe that Chesterfield was by any means the monster of
ugliness and selfish levity whom his enemies, and some who called
themselves his friends, have painted for posterity. He was, says
Hervey, short, disproportioned, thick, and clumsily made; had a broad,
rough-featured, ugly face, with black teeth, and a head big enough for
a Polyphemus. "One Ben Ashurst, who said few good things, though
admired for many, told Lord Chesterfield once that he was like a
stunted giant, which was a humorous idea and really apposite." His
portraits do not by any means bear out the common descriptions of his
personal appearance. Doubtless, Court painters then, as now, flattered
or idealized, but one can scarcely believe that any painter coolly
converted a hideous face into a rather handsome one and went wholly
unreproved by public opinion of his time. The truth probably is that
Chesterfield's bitter, sarcastic, and unsparing tongue made him
enemies, who came in the end to see nothing but deformity in his person
and perfidy in his heart. It is easy to say epigrammatically of such a
man that his propensity to ridicule, in which he indulged himself with
infinite humor and no distinction, and with inexhaustible spirits and
no discretion, made him sought and feared, liked and not loved, by most
of his acquaintance; it is easy to say that {7} no sex, no relation, no
rank, no power, no profession, no friendship, no obligation, was a
shield from those pointed, glittering weapons that seemed only to shine
to a stander-by, but cut deep in those they touched. But to say this
is not to say all, or to paint a fair picture. It is evident that he
delighted in passing himself off on serious and heavy people as a mere
trifler, paradox-maker, and cynic. He invited them not to take him
seriously, and they did take him seriously, but the wrong way. They
believed that he was serious when he professed to have no faith in
anything; when he declared that he only lived for pleasure, and did not
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account