1815 But now he throws that shallow habit by, Let my unsounded self, suppos'd a fool, "Why, Collatine, is woe the cure for woe? Is it revenge to give thyself a blow 66 ceeds; 1825 Thy wretched wife mistook the matter so, To slay herself, that should have slain her foe. Courageous Roman, do not steep thy heart In such relenting dew of lamentations; But kneel with me and help to bear thy part, 1830 To rouse our Roman gods with invocations That they will suffer these abominations, Since Rome herself in them doth stand disgraced, By our strong arms from forth her fair streets chased. THE first collective edition of Shakespeare's Sonnets was published by Thomas Thorpe in 1609. It is manifest that the copy was surreptitiously obtained, and the volume issued without the author's consent. The Sonnets were not again reprinted till they appeared with much miscellaneous matter in an edition published in 1640. Thorpe's edition is the basis of the present text. The date of composition is a matter of dispute. It is recognized that the period during which they were written must have included several years, but which years is not agreed. The chief external evidence is the reference in Meres's Palladis Tamia (1598) to his "sugred Sonnets among his private friends," a phrase which implies that some were then in private circulation. This is strengthened by the printing of Sonnets 138 and 144 in the Passionate Pilgrim in 1599. There is nothing but internal evidence to tell us whether the order in which they appear in the edition of 1609 is due to the poet. A certain amount of reason in the present arrangement is admitted by all. A large number of the Sonnets 1 to 126 are addressed to a man; many of those after 126 to a woman. But many in both divisions have no indication of the sex of the person addressed; and not a few are generalized utterances addressed to no one in particular. Viewed in the light of the vast contemporary sonnet literature, many of these poems belong to well-recognized literary conventions. The pleading with a beautiful youth to marry; the power of verse to bestow immortality; the analysis of amorous emotion; the vituperation of the lady; the adulation of a noble patron; - these and other themes belong to the traditions of the form which were well established before Shakespeare essayed it. But after this is recognized, the question remains whether, in re-working these ideas with unexampled brilliance and intensity, Shakespeare was prompted by mere professional emulation, or by actual personal experiences for which the current conventions gave a suitable form of utterance, or by such an imaginative impulse as lies behind the living utterances of his dramatic creations. It must be admitted that some sonnets are so artificial as to make plausible for them the first explanation; others, especially those expressing the uncommon situation in which his friend wins his lady away from him, while the poet retains his passion for both, and those referring to the indignity of the actor's profession, may have reference to real incidents in his life; but the splendor of the poems as a whole is mainly due to the same cause as gave supreme distinction to his dramatic productions. — the intensity of the imaginative fervor of an essentially poetic mind. From this point of view it will be seen that attempts to decide the question of "sincerity" by historical identifications are bound to be futile and misleading, implying as they do a misconception of the nature of artistie emotion. As to the personages involved, one party identifies the fair youth with William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke, and finds confirmation in the " Mr. W. H." to whom Thorpe dedicated the volume. But it is possible that the "onlie begetter" was merely the publisher's friend who procured the manuscript. The Pembroke theory implies the later dating of the majority of the poems (1598– 1601), and is usually, though not necessarily, held to imply the identification of the "dark lady' with the blond Mistress Mary Fitton. Another finds in the young nobleman Shakespeare's early patron, the Earl of Southampton; and this view implies that most of the personal sonnets belong to the years 1594-98. As to the rival poet or poets alluded to in Sonnets 78-86, Chapman, Drayton, Jonson, Barnes, and others have been proposed; but on this point we have not, nor are likely to have, anything approaching assurance. Look in thy glass, and tell the face thou viewest For where is she so fair whose unear'd womb But if thou live, rememb'red not to be, 4 10 Unthrifty loveliness, why dost thou spend So great a sum of sums, yet canst not live? 6 10 Thy unus'd beauty must be tomb'd with thee, Which, used, lives the executor to be. 5 Those hours, that with gentle work did frame Lo! in the orient when the gracious light So thou, thyself out-going in thy noon, 8 10 Music to hear, why hear'st thou music sadly? Or else receiv'st with pleasure thine annoy? one, 10 Sings this to thee: "Thou single wilt prove none." 9 Is it for fear to wet a widow's eye That thou consum'st thyself in single life? Look, what an unthrift in the world doth spend Shifts but his place, for still the world enjoys it; But beauty's waste hath in the world an end, And kept unus'd, the user so destroys it. 10 No love toward others in that bosom sits That on himself such murderous shame commits. Not from the stars do I my judgement pluck; Thy end is truth's and beauty's doom and date. 10 But thy eternal summer shall not fade When in eternal lines to time thou grow'st; So long as men can breathe or eyes can see, So long lives this and this gives life to thee. 19 Devouring Time, blunt thou the lion's paws, And make the earth devour her own sweet brood; Pluck the keen teeth from the fierce tiger's jaws, And burn the long-liv'd phoenix in her blood; Make glad and sorry seasons as thou fleets, And do whate'er thou wilt, swift-footed Time, To the wide world and all her fading sweets; But I forbid thee one most heinous crime: |