quaint fancies, glances of wit and wisdom, felicitous epithet, racy similes, aphoristic sayings, bird-like notes of genuine music, and now and then, powerful sarcasm, will meet the studious reader. The HITHERTO UNPUBLISHED MSS., which include, besides secular poems, his long vainly-sought Metaphrase of certain Psalms, speak for themselves. And so I leave the Reader to raise the lid of the casket of gems now put into his hands. It demands robustness of brain and sensibilities of spirit to appreciate adequately Sir John Davies as a Poet; but if, in all humility of receptiveness and open-eyedness, these volumes be read, no one competent can go away unimpressed. Whether as Thinker or Singer he must be placed among the rare few who have enriched our highest Literature.

ALEXANDER B. GROSART.

POSTSCRIPT.

MINOR POEMS, ETC.

HERE are several things relative to the Minor Poems

THERE

of Sir John Davies that require statement and eluci

dation; and I deem it well to give such.

I. The Ten Sonnets to Philomel and Hymn to

Music.

II. The Entertainment to Elizabeth at Harefield by the Countess of Derby.

III. The Poem to King James Ist.
IV. Dacus not Samuel Daniel.

V. Marston and "Orchestra," &c.

VI. Hymnes to Astræa.

66

I. The Ten Sonnets to Philomel and Hymn to Music. In my Fuller Worthies' Library edition of Davies, I admitted Canzonet a Hymne in praise of Musick among his Poems (pp. 297-9) because in the " Rhapsody" it bore his initials I. D. precisely as his other accepted pieces therein did. But I excluded the "Ten Sonnets to Philomel' from their having the signature originally of "Melophilus," and I. D. only subsequently. I too hastily agreed with Sir Egerton Brydges (in his edition of the "Rhapsody" 2 Vols., 1826) in assigning

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

Slate Queen

“Sports, Masks, and Entertainments to ye the King," &c.

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 "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. evidence, e.g.:

Absence hear this my protestation. Unsigned in all four editions.

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 Dauis— I. 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