CHAPTER XVIII.

SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF INTERPRETATION.

IT has been considered that in Jonson's Bartholomew Fair (1614), Act v. sc. 3, there is an allusion to Shakespeare's Sonnets, or the circumstances connected with them, in what is said of Damon and Pythias, "two faithful friends o' the Bankside," who "have but one drab." Considering the mention of Burbage and the Bankside, together with other allusions, the supposed reference may be regarded as possible, though I should not like to say more. We may suppose, however, that to Jonson probably the main facts concerning Shakespeare, his friend, and the dark lady would be known, even if such knowledge was not very widely diffused among the general public. It seems, indeed, not quite easy to understand how-if the facts connected with the Sonnets had become extensively known-in a time so short as twentyfour years from the death of Shakespeare, and ten from that of Herbert, so great a departure from the truth as that manifested by the edition of 1640 could possibly have

1 Dowden mentions this supposed allusion, citing, with reference to it, Elze's William Shakespeare, p. 499. Dowden remarks, also, in the same place (larger ed. of Sonnets, p. 45), that some critics have supposed an allusion to Thorpe's dedication (to Mr. W. H.) in Jonson's dedication of his Epigrams to "William Earl of Pembroke, Lord Chamberlain, &c." In the dedication Jonson says that he dare not change Pembroke's title, and that there was nothing in his Epigrams in expressing which he needed to employ a cipher. But there may possibly be an allusion to playing on the Will" in Pembroke's name. Cf. Sonnets 135, 136, and also John Davies of Hereford's dedication of his "Select Second Husband" to Pembroke contains the verse, 'For Will (good- Will) desired it might be YOU" (Grosart's Reprint in Chertsey Worthies' Library, vol. ii.).

"

"

K

occurred. Even upon the supposition that the publisher Benson thought that poems in which affection was so warmly expressed would suit the public taste better when treated as addressed to a woman, he could scarcely have made so great changes in their order, and have given some of them the titles prefixed in his edition, if the truth with regard to the Sonnets had been very widely known. Whatever the cause-whether that the Sonnets did " puzzle intellect," and were not quite so "elegantly plain" and free from difficulty as Benson wished to make out—it seems pretty clear that he was right in saying that they had not obtained their "due accomodation of proportionable glory."

The opinion that the Sonnets are concerned mainly with female fascinations-whether previously existing in the public mind or originating in Benson's publication-would seem to have prevailed, so far, indeed, as the Sonnets received any attention, for considerably more than a century. When the edition of 1609 was reprinted, circ. 1710, the statement appeared on the title that all the hundred and fifty-four Sonnets were in praise of the poet's mistress. Seventy years later (1780) Malone gave expression to the fact of which the evidence was unmistakable, that the first one hundred and twenty-six Sonnets were addressed to a male friend of the poet's. Here, at any rate, light was let in on the darkness. As to who was this male friend of Shakespeare no suggestion of any value appears to have been made either by Malone or his friends. Malone thought that Tyrwhitt's "conjecture will not appear improbable" that "the initials W. H. in the Dedication stand for W. Hughes," a person otherwise unknown. Drake in 1817 identified Lord Southampton with the subject of Sonnets 1 to 126.1 As to the last twenty-eight, they had, in his opinion, no reference to any particular individual. Certainly, however, Southampton is not the

1 Shakespeare and his Times, vol. ii. p. 62.

person addressed in the first series of Sonnets, and with regard to the remainder, Drake's assertion was a receding from the more just position of Malone that the last "twenty-eight are addressed to a lady."

It was not long after the date of Drake's work that Mr. B. Heywood Bright mentioned in a private communication (1819) his discovery of the similarity between the "W. H." of the Dedication of the Sonnets and the name of William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke, to whom the First Folio had been dedicated. Mr. Bright did not, however, at the time issue any publication giving the results he had attained; but thirteen years later (1832) Mr. James Boaden, working independently, published in the Gentleman's Magazine conclusions identical with those at which Mr. Bright had arrived. Some difficulties remained, but the identity of William Herbert with Shakespeare's friend of the Sonnets was shown to rest on grounds of much probability; and thus a very important additional step was taken towards the true understanding of the Sonnets.

This step was accepted and sanctioned by Mr. C. Armitage Brown in his work entitled Shakespeare's Autobio graphical Poems (1838). Mr. Brown divided the Sonnets I to 152 into six poems, alleging that "the two Sonnets printed at the end, about Cupid and a nymph of Diana, belong to nothing but themselves." Mr. Brown's division cannot be fully accepted; it was, however, as follows:-(I.) I to 26. "To his friend, persuading him to marry;" (II.) 27 to 55. "To his friend-who had robbed the poet of his mistress-forgiving him;" (III.) 56 to 77. "To his friend, complaining of his coldness, and warning him of life's decay;" (IV.) 78 to 101. "To his friend, complaining that he prefers another poet's praises, and reproving him for faults that may injure his character;" (V.) 102 to 126. “To his friend, excusing himself for having been some time silent, and disclaiming the charge of inconstancy;" (VI.) 127 to 152. "To his mistress on her infidelity.”

Mr. Brown's work marks a distinct advance in the manner in which it recognises the basis of fact underlying the Sonnets, and in the assignment of 153 and 154 to a distinct group.

Even in so brief a sketch as this Hallam (1840) may be mentioned on account of his firm grasp of important results previously attained, and also because of his expressing the opinion that the Sonnets were written about the year 1601, some earlier and some later.1 In 1866 Mr. Gerald Massey published a large volume on the Sonnets (The Secret Drama of Shakespeare's Sonnets), which, however, unless it be in some matters of detail, can scarcely be said to have promoted the true interpretation.2 A similar remark may be made with regard to the work of Mr. Henry Brown, published in 1870; a work in some respects meritorious, but disfigured by a conceit so absurd as that of Shakespeare having married his Muse to Herbert.3 Professor Minto in 1874 made an important addition to what previous interpreters had effected, by his identification of the rival poet with George Chapman. In 1877, as a part of the Introduction to the Leopold Shakspere (1877), Dr. Furnivall gave the fruits of his investigations into the connection of the Sonnets, making in this respect an important advance on the work of Mr. Armitage Brown. Hertzberg in 1878 (Shakespeare Jahrbuch) was able to indicate the source whence Sonnets 153 and 154 were derived. In 1881 Professor Dowden published his valuable editions, with Introduction and Notes, giving the results of his own researches and a large mass of important information. With regard to the growing consensus of opinion as to the nature of the Sonnets, Dowden observes" With Wordsworth, Sir Henry Taylor, and Mr. Swinburne; with François Victor Hugo; with Kreyssig

4

1 Literature of Europe, Part III., chaps. v., vi.

2 The same remark may be made of the new edition, 1888.

3 The Sonnets of Shakespeare Solved, Lond., 1870.

4 Characteristics of English Poets, 2nd edit., pp. 221 sqq.

Ulrici, Gervinus, and Hermann Isaac; with Boaden, Armitage Brown, and Hallam; with Furnivall, Spalding, Rossetti, and Palgrave, I believe that Shakespeare's Sonnets express his own feelings in his own person.'

Other contributions to the interpretation of the Sonnets are mentioned elsewhere. By the omission of various works and other productions from this brief sketch, I do not wish to be understood as expressing the opinion that these are without value. For a fuller account of the literature of the Sonnets I must refer the reader to the bibliographical notices in Professor Dowden's larger edition. It is to be hoped that at a future time he may be able to make this part of his work even yet more exhaustive, by including some publications which he mentions as having been inaccessible to him.

1 Larger edition of Shakspere's Sonnets, pp. 16, 17.