inner history from the Sonnets."1 And another critic remarks, "Something which seems more than human in immensity of range and calmness of insight moves before us in the Plays; but from the nature of dramatic writing, the author's personality is inevitably veiled; . . . and even when we turn to the Sonnets, though each is an autobiographical confession, we find ourselves equally foiled. These revelations of the poet's innermost nature appear to teach us less of the man than the tone of mind which we trace, or seem to trace, in Measure for Measure, Hamlet, and the Tempest; the strange imagery of passion which passes over the magic mirror has no tangible existence before or behind it." 1 It may be hoped, however, that the reader who follows the present inquiry will come to a different conclusion. Of the several problems which present themselves, some of the more important will, it is believed, yield entirely to ordinary and well-understood critical methods. With regard to others, without resorting to any special expedient for "solving the Sonnets," we may at least attain results of reasonable probability. § 2. Aim and Intention.— At the outset, and on a merely general view, one or two remarks may be made as to the object which Shakespeare had in view when composing these poems. The Sonnets have been described as "autobiographical." Such a description may possibly mislead. It may be regarded as implying that the poet's chief intent was to communicate, either to his contemporaries or to posterity, some particulars in his inner life or his outer history. Certainly such a view would be inaccurate. A man's letters to his friends cannot be correctly described as autobiography, even though they may convey important information concerning various facts in his history. And Shakespeare's Sonnets are for the most part poetical epistles. 1 J. R. Green, History of the English People, vol. ii. pp. 473, 483. 2 F. T. Palgrave, Songs and Sonnets of Shakespeare, p. 239. Some of them have, no doubt, a different character, but these we may for the present disregard, as we are taking a very broad and general view; and we need not now consider the question whether Shakespeare wrote all or any of the Sonnets with a view to subsequent publication. §3. Poetical Form.-The poetical form which Shakespeare employed has been criticised as being inferior to that which Milton used so nobly some thirty or forty years later. For our present purpose it is unnecessary to distinguish between the Miltonic and the Petrarchan Sonnet. Of the latter, an eminent authority on the subject has said that it aims at sonority, while "the quest of the Shakespearian Sonnet" is "sweetness; and the sweetest of all possible arrangements in English versification is a succession of decasyllabic quatrains in alternate rhymes, knit together and clinched by a couplet." On this view, the fitness of the form which Shakespeare adopted can scarcely be questioned. It was a form, moreover, which we may regard as better suited for poetical epistles of varying length than the more sonorous Petrarchan or Miltonic Sonnet, though the latter may deserve to be preferred for self-contained and independent poems. Whether poems consisting of several Sonnet-stanzas would always be the best form for poetical epistles, and whether Shakespeare's plenitude of poetical force would not have been unduly hampered by any form of Sonnet, are questions which we need not attempt now to determine either one way or the other. It must be observed, however, that though the form which Shakespeare adopted now bears his name, yet it had been moulded on English ground by his poetical predecessors and contemporaries, and Sonnets of similar form had been linked together; as, for example, by Spenser.2 1 Mr. T. Watts in Encyclopædia Britannica (9th edit.), art. "Sonnet." Cf. also Mr. William Sharp's Introduction to Sonnets of the Century. 2 The variation in Spenser's Sonnets need not be here taken into account. That a single Shakespearian Sonnet is comparatively seldom an independent poem will be sufficiently manifest hereafter. It may be enough here to give one or two examples of continuation and connection. Thus Sonnet 65 begins "Since brass, nor stone, nor earth, nor boundless sea, Here the word "since" manifestly refers to the preceding Sonnet, which tells of the ravages of Time; of lofty towers being "down rased," of "brass eternal, slave to mortal rage," of "the firm soil" increasing with the loss of "the wat'ry main," and of "the hungry ocean gaining advantage on the kingdom of the shore." Not much farther on are four Sonnets (71 to 74) linked together by the thought that the person addressed may survive the poet, and, through excessive love, lament unduly for his death. The first of these Sonnets puts a limit to the grief: all mourning is to be over when the bell ceases tolling : "No longer mourn for me when I am dead, From this vile world, with vilest worms to dwell." The reason alleged in the last two lines of the Sonnet is that the "wise world" may possibly make a mock at undue lamentation over one so unworthy. The thought of these last two lines is enlarged upon in the following Sonnet (72), in which the poet asserts that his works do not merit esteem, though they are loved by the person addressed. This excessive love is reverted to in 73, but accounted for differently. The poet is in the autumn of life, the time of yellow leaves and leafless boughs : "This thou perceiv'st, which makes thy love more strong, Of the Sonnets mentioned above (71 to 74), the last urges the consolatory thought that when the poet's body has become the "prey of worms," and has been yielded up to the earth, a memorial will remain in his verses. In these something of his spirit and his life will be treasured up : "But be contented: when that fell arrest My life hath in this line some interest, Which for memorial still with thee shall stay," &c. Perhaps the longest chain of Sonnets is 100 to 126, written after a period of separation and estrangement. These are to be regarded, most probably, as a single poem, giving various explanations relating to this period, and asserting the poet's undiminished affection. § 4. Orderly Arrangement.—But are the Sonnets, as a whole, arranged in due order and in chronological sequence? In answer to this question it may be said, that if, as we have seen, some portions are duly arranged, this will render it to some extent probable that the case is the same with the whole collection. But here it should be observed that the Sonnets are to be divided into two, or, perhaps still better, into three series. By far the larger proportion, I to 126, are addressed to an intimate male friend of the poet, a youth high-born, and wealthy, and beautiful. 127 to 152 are concerned mainly with a certain lady of dark complexion, the poet's mistress. Then there remain the last two Sonnets in the collection, 153 and 154, which have a character of their own. The question as to the order of arrangement is, however, chiefly of importance with respect to the first series, 1 to 126. Or, if we put aside 100 to 126, mentioned just above, we may restrict the question within narrower limits, and ask, Are 1 to 99 arranged in order of time, in the right order? In reply, it may be observed that the collection begins with seventeen Sonnets urging on the poet's friend the duty and desirableness of perpetuating his beauty in offspring. The Sonnets concerned with this subject are found together, not scattered promiscuously throughout the entire number—a fact which at once suggests the idea of arrangement. Then we observe that, although in one of these first Sonnets the poet, complying with old custom, addresses his friend as "love" (13), yet, on the whole, the language employed does not express an affection so warm and intimate as that which manifests itself in some of the Sonnets which follow. We remark, also, that, even in these first Sonnets, there are traces of a melancholic view of the world. Youth and beauty are fleeting. Life's golden summer must give place to "hideous winter." Old age creeps on with stealthy tread, disfiguring the glory of manhood with bareness and with wrinkles. Time's remorseless scythe will level all. But melancholy thus expressed appears but mild when compared with what is to follow. By and by the gloom will deepen into pessimistic darkness. The poet, wearied with the world and its perversities, will cry out for "restful death” (66). Manifestly, when this occurs, an exhortation to marry and beget offspring will have become incongruous. Further evidence of due order and arrangement is furnished by a number of Sonnets relating to another poet, a rival, or supposed rival, for the friend's favour. The apprehension of rivalry is at first ambiguously expressed (75, line 6), then (78 seq.) more and more openly adverted to, till in 86 there is a scarcely doubtful designation of the person intended. In 87, Shakespeare, not having succeeded in ousting his rival, bids his friend farewell. Thus, that the Sonnets relating to the rival poet are in the right order seems scarcely open to question. And considering that we have to do with poetical epistles, no valid objection is furnished by the fact that in 77 and 81 the poet glances aside for a moment from this subject. Such divergence would be quite suitable in a letter. There is a somewhat similar series, though not unbroken, concerned with an offence against the poet committed by his friend. Here again there appears no reason to conclude that the order in which the Sonnets are found is not the order of composi |