Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

them to Dean Donne. I could not discern Donne's manner in the 'Canzonet,' and so had no difficulty in rejecting Brydges' alleged 'internal evidence' in respect of it, initialled as it was. Neither did I find the 'internal evidence' in the 'Ten Sonnets' for its Donne authorship, but, in addition to the early signature "Melophilus," there was a note of "Manuscripts to get" by Davison, from Donne, that has seemed to warrant the "Ten Sonnets" being regarded as his contribution, and the later I. D. as representing J[ohn] D[onne], and not Sir John Davies. My friend Dr. Brinsley Nicholson has satisfied me that Davison's List of MSS. to be received could not refer to his "Rhapsody," but to some other intended work or private collection; and so the one point in favour of Donne falls to the ground. The evidence as communicated to myself, and since, in a lengthy communication to the Athenæum (January 22d, 1876), may be thus summarized. (1) There is nothing in Davison's notings which even hints that he was thinking of the "Rhapsody." (2) The greater number of the MSS. mentioned never appeared even by a specimen in the "Rhapsody." (3) The second entry is of "Sports, Masks, and Entertainments to ye the King," &c. Slate Queen

Therefore it was written in or after 1603. But the

first edition of the "Rhapsody" containing the "Hymn to Music" signed I. D., and the "Ten Sonnets" signed "Melophilus," and in the subsequent editions I. D., was published in 1602, (4) There is not in the subsequent editions a single piece by any of these memorandum-noted authors that is not in the first-so shewing further that the memorandum had no reference to the

[ocr errors]

Rhapsody." Of Donne and Constable there are in the editions 1608, 1611, 1621, only those given in 1602, and in no edition at all is there a single specimen of Ben Jonson, Hodgson, Harington, Joseph Hall, &c., &c. There remains thus only (5). The I. D.

[blocks in formation]

That two are unsigned in the 1621 edition is probably due to omission made during the thorough re-distribution of the pieces into books of Odes, &c., &c. Further (6) the "Hymn to Music" and the "Ten Sonnets" follow consecutively, and are the very first among the "pieces by sundry others." So in editions of 1608 and 1611 the "Twelve Wonders," "Lottery," and "Contention" are the first of

the new pieces, in fact, open the book and follow one another successively in a group of three-John DauisI. D.-John Davies. (7) We gather from inspection of the "Table" that (a) the "Lottery," I. D., is John Davies; (b) that Davison put I. D. after the "Lottery," knowing that he had already appropriated I. D. to the author of the " Hymne;" and what is more, he chose to put I. D. to the "Lottery" just when he associated the "Ten Sonnets" with I. D. and John Davies' poems by altering Melophilus to I. D.; (c) at the same time. he left "Absence hear," &c., unsigned; (d) what has been said under (5) and (6) suggests that Davies was a personal friend of Davison's, and this is strengthened by there being no MS. of Davies noted as "to get." If so, Davison was still less likely to use ambiguous initials for anything by Davies. Once more (8) When we add to this that the "Hymne" must go with the "Ten Sonnets" and that it is clearly by the author of "Orchestra "; and that neither the "Hymne" nor the "Ten Sonnets" appear in any collection of Donne's poems printed or in MS. the external evidence in favour of Sir John Davies as author of the work is as strong as it well can be. Internally the student of "Orchestra" and the "Hymnes to Astræa" will readily see the "fine Roman hand" that wrote them in the "Hymne to

Music" and related "Ten Sonnets to Philomel." There is none of the style, or conceits, or wording, or rhythm of Donne. I add finally (9) If the "Ten Sonnets to Philomel" were based on real love experiences, we can understand how at first at any rate the disguise of "Melophilus" might be preferred to I. D. It does not seem probable that they were addressed to her who became his wife. In accord with all this both the "Hymne to Music" and the "Ten Sonnets to Philomel" are now included among Sir John Davies's Poems (Vol. ii. pp. 96—106.

II. The Entertainment to Elizabeth at Harefield by the Countess of Derby. In the foot-notes to the "Lottery," (Vol. II., pp. 87-94) several variations from Manningham's "Diary" are accepted as decided improvements, especially those in VII., XIX., and xxi., which were probably taken from a revised or autograph MS. That Manningham had full information on the "Lottery" is proved by the list he gives of the persons to whom the 'lots' went, viz., I., To hir Mtie. III. La[dy] Scroope. XXVII. La[dy] Scudamore. vi. Lady Francis. VII. Earle of Darby's countes. VIII. Lady Southwell, II. Countess of Darby dowager: [the Lord Keeper's wife]. XII. Countess of Kildare. XIII. La[dy] Effingham. XIX. La[dy] Newton. XXI. Not named.

XXII. La[dy] Warwike. xxv. La[dy] Dorothy. XXXIII. La[dy] Susan.... XXXII. La[dy] Kidderminster. xxxI. Blank. But there remains an interesting question to be settled, viz., the date of this "Lottery." Nichols, apparently on the sole authority of the "Rhapsody," gives it to a visit to the Lord Keeper's town-house [York House] in 1601; and assigns it to York House because Sir Thomas Egerton did not buy Harefield till 1602, and clearly by the speeches in the "Entertainment" the Queen had never been there before August, 1602. But the "Rhapsody" date is a slip of Davison's pen or of his printer for 1602, and the "Lottery" took place at Harefield as part of the "Entertainment." Notices in the "Lottery " itself guide us to this conclusion, e.g., it was about August, for in Lot 22 we read:— "Tis Summer yet,

[ocr errors]

But 'twill be winter one day, doubt you not."

and the visit to Harefield was in August. Then there is this to be noted that the masquer is "A Mariner supposed to come from the Carrick." Let

6 the' be marked 'the Carrick.' The allusion is historical. The Queen sent out Sir Richard Levison (or Lawson) and Sir William Morrison on 19th and 26th March, 1602 to intercept the plate fleet and do any other damage along the Spanish coast. They did not get the

« PredošláPokračovať »