For the allusive and fragmentary style of the _Giaour_, _The Voyage of Columbus_, which Rogers published in 1812, is in part responsible. "It is sudden in its transitions," wrote the author, in the Preface to the first edition, "... leaving much to be imagined by the reader." The story or a part of it is told by a fellow-seaman of Columbus, who had turned "eremite" in his old age, and though the narrative itself is in heroic verse, the prologue and epilogue, as they may be termed, are in "the romance or ballad-measure of the Spanish." The resemblance between the two poems is certainly more than accidental. On the other hand, a vivid and impassioned description of Oriental scenery and customs was, as Gifford observed, new and original, and though, by his own admission, Byron was indebted to _Vathek_ (or rather S. Henley's notes to _Vathek_) and to D'Herbelot's _Bibliothèque Orientale_ for allusions and details, the "atmosphere" could only have been reproduced by the creative fancy of an observant and enthusiastic traveller who had lived under Eastern skies, and had come within ken of Eastern life and sentiment. In spite, however, of his love for the subject-matter of his poem, and the facility, surprising even to himself, with which he spun his rhymes, Byron could not persuade himself that a succession of fragments would sort themselves and grow into a complete and connected whole. If his thrice-repeated depreciation of the _Giaour_ is not entirely genuine, it is plain that he misdoubted himself. Writing to Murray (August 26, 1813) he says, "I have, but with some difficulty, _not_ added any more to this snake of a poem, which has been lengthening its rattles every month;" to Moore (September 1), "The _Giaour_ I have added to a good deal, but still in foolish fragments;" and, again, to Moore (September 8), "By the coach I send you a copy of that awful pamphlet the _Giaour_." But while the author doubted and apologized, or deprecated "his love's excess In words of wrong and bitterness," the public read, and edition followed edition with bewildering speed. The _Giaour_ was reviewed by George Agar Ellis in the _Quarterly_ (No. xxxi., January, 1813 [published February 11, 1813]) and in the _Edinburgh Review_ by Jeffrey (No. 54, January, 1813 [published February 24, 1813]). BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE ON _THE GIAOUR_