Of these men it is probable that Giambattista Casti (1721–1804) is the nearest congener of Byron in the satiric field. The fact that his work has never been subjected to careful scrutiny by critics in either Italy or England accounts possibly for the general ignoring of Casti as an inspiration for Byron’s Italian satires.[197] In spite of Eichler’s positive statement that the Italians “aus zeitlichen Gruenden” may be neglected as sources for Byron’s work,[198] it is certain that Byron had read Casti before he wrote _Beppo_; for in 1816 he said to Major Gordon, referring to a copy of Casti’s _Novelle_ which the latter had presented to him at Brussels: “I cannot tell you what a treat your gift of Casti has been to me: I have got him almost by heart. I had read his _Animali Parlanti_, but I think these _Novelle_ much better. I long to go to Venice to see the manners so admirably described.”[199] Not until March 25, 1818, does he mention Berni, and he does not refer to Pulci until November, 1819. There is, then, presumptive evidence for maintaining that Byron, coming in 1816 or before in contact with the work of Casti, found in him some inspiration for the satiric method of _Beppo_, a method somewhat modified in _Don Juan_ after a perusal of Berni and Pulci. The _Novelle_, praised so highly by Byron, consist of forty-eight tales in ottava rima, printed together in 1804, although at least eighteen had been completed by 1778. Their author, a sort, of itinerant rhymester,[200] had acquired notoriety through his attacks on the reigning sovereigns of Europe, especially on Catharine II, whom he had assailed in _Il Poema Tartaro_, a realistic and venomous portrayal of Russian society and politics, containing a violent assault on the Empress. Although Casti’s poems are now forgotten, their vogue during his lifetime was considerable. His greatest work, _Gli Animali Parlanti_, was translated into several languages, including English, and Casti, as an apostle of revolt, was recognized as energetic and dangerous. His coarseness and vulgarity, however, combined with his slovenly verse structure and his neglect of art, prevented him from reaching a high position as a poet, and his literary importance was thus only temporary, occasioned principally by the popular interest in his timely satiric allusions. He, like Byron, was at heart a rebel, and in his own uncultivated way, he anticipated the spirit of the English poet. Indeed it is curious how often the two pursue the same general plan of attack on their respective ages.