In the Preface to his play Sardanapalus (1822), Byron claims that he has tempted to preserve . . . the 'unities.'1 has done so, fully aware of the unpopularity of this notion in present English Literature. If the unities are no longer popular in England, they are still so in the more civilized parts of the world. This notion of a barbaric England constitutes a deliberate provocation in the face of frequent contemporary claims about British superiority.2 Patriots stressed that England was a free country in which benevolent monarchy had replaced the coercive violence typical of barbaric states. For many of Byron's contemporaries no state in Europe better exemplified this barbarous condition than Napoleonic France. Rejecting the patriotic view of British political benev olence, Byron claims that the British are seduced by Napoleonic barbarism and the spectacle of martial violence. Although his play is set in ancient Assyria, it references contemporary rep resentations of war, British monarchy and Napoleonic rule.3 British kings, like Byron's fictional ruler, Sardanapalus, attempt to represent themselves as be nevolent figures of the people who respect the freedoms of their subjects. But this claim to an almost democratic disposition only masks the fact that, for Byron, political seductions in England are conducted in Napoleonic and not democratic terms. If British monarchs, like Burke's feeble king in the Reflec tions, appear to hold power at the pleasure of their people, this representation is a useful ruse. For Byron, the people require a warrior leader who represents the national virility by performing acts of spectacular martial violence. Byron, more than any other writer of his time, was well acquainted with the aesthetics of violence and the importance of seduction, having created a series of heroes in his eastern tales who dazzle and enchant their followers by appearing to be endowed with a magical and explosively violent power that compels obedi ence.4 Followers accept their submission to such a leader because he appears to be the embodiment of the community's power.5 As critics have noted re cently, Byron's late writings enact a critique of the popular Byronic hero.6 Wil liam Hazlitt wrote about Byron that: He hallows in order to desecrate; takes