Abbildungen der Seite
[ocr errors][merged small]


5 5

In the last line page 59, for scatteerd” read scattered.
In the 17th line from the top of page 131, for "much simplicity" read much of the




B 2

In the 3rd line from the top of page 33 insert the word with after the word

In the 17th line from the top of page 35, forattributed the whole series to him"

read supposed the whole series to be addressed to him,
In the last line but one on page 91, for "after" read in.
In the ninth line of the first sonnet on page 134, for "nor" read or.
In the 3rd line of 3rd stanza page 185, for rebels" read revels.
In the 7th line of the second sonnet on page 188, for "like" read on.
In the foot-note page 223, for“ character” read characters, and for his” read their.




[ocr errors]

At a time when our elder poets are so much studied, and so justly admired, it seems not a little extraordinary that the Sonnets of the immortal Shakespeare should be almost utterly neglected. When alluded to, as they rarely are, by modern critics, it is generally to echo the flippant insolence of Steevens, who asserted that nothing short of the strongest act of parliament could enlist readers into their service. We know, however, that in Shakespeare's life-time, these “sugred sonnets," as Meres quaintly calls them, were in great esteem, and were for a long while far better known than many of the Plays, which fell into comparative disrepute for some time before the author's death, and were not published in a collected form until several years after. Only eleven of the Dramas were printed during the Poet's life. Shakespeare died (on his birth-day, April 23,) in 1616. The first complete edition was printed in 1623, and was the joint speculation of four booksellers ; a circumstance from which Malone infers, that no single publisher was at the time willing to risk his money on an entire collection of the plays.

*“An almost impenetrable darkness rests on the question, and no effort has hitherto, in the smallest degree, tended to disperse the gloom."- Drake.



A bookseller of the name of Jaggard did not hesitate to publish on his own account, in 1599, the sonnets which appear under the title of The Passionate Pilgrim,” even in defiance of the author, or at all events without consulting his wishes. The collection was so inaccurate and made with so little care, that Marlowe's madrigal, • Come live with me, &c.” was included in it as the production of Shakespeare. The unpopularity of Shakespeare's dramatic works, during even the greater part of the 17th century, is another illustration, to be added to a thousand others, of the capriciousness of the public taste. In one hundred years were published only four editions of his plays, and now perhaps, next to the Bible, the exclusive copyright of these works would be more valuable than that of any other publication that has yet appeared.

When we reflect upon the manner in which the plays have been subjected to the fickleness of the public mind, we ought perhaps to be less surprised at the fate of the Sonnets. There are also certain considerations connected with the latter, which may render their present unpopularity a mystery of more easy solution.

In the first place, we must recollect the equivocal nature of their subject, and secondly, the unpopular character of the sonnet as a peculiar form of verse. It is true, that at the time of their original publication, the sonnet was a fashionable species of composition, but it forced its way into notice rather from the great reputation of its cultivators, than from its own actual adaptation to the general taste.

Another cause of their neglect may be discovered in the enmity of Steevens, whose arrogant and tasteless criticisms have had a strange influence over succeeding commentators. Alexander Chalmers observes, that “it is perhaps necessary that some notice should be taken of Shakespeare's poems, in an account of his life and writings, although they have never” (which is not true)


“been favorites with the public;" but all he ventures to add on so insignificant and unworthy a subject is, that the peremptory decision of Mr. Steevens, on the merits of these poems, severe as it is, only amounts to the general conclusion of modern critics ! He has also the audacity to pretend, that it is necessary to offer some apology for inserting the poems of William Shakespeare in his voluminous collection of the British Poets ! He is bold enough to assert that there are“ scattered beauties” in the sonnets, “enough, it is hoped, to justify their admission” into the same collection, in which Gorbet, Turbeville, Pitt, Yalden, Hughes, Duke, King, Sprat, Walsh and Pomfret, have each an honorable place!

In most of the critical and biographical notices of Shakespeare, a contemptuous silence is observed on the subject of the sonnets; and indeed the mass of readers, at the present day, are not

aware that Shakespeare is the author of a volume of Miscellaneous Poems. Wordsworth, in one of his prefaces to his own poems, (published in 1815,) announces it as an interesting fact, that such a work is extant, and that it is every way worthy of the illustrious Shakespeare. Dr. Drake, however, is the only writer who has taken up the subject with the enthusiasm which every thing connected with that glorious name is so well calculated to awaken. His indefatigable industry, and the genuine love of literature, which he on all occasions exhibits, excite the respect and sympathy of every generous mind. He has contributed more than


other critic with whom I am acquainted to revive these unjustly neglected poems.

A regret has often been expressed that we have little beyond a collection of barren dates in what is called the Life of Shakespeare. Now, I conceive, and in this opinion I do not stand alone, that if any new light is to be thrown on Shakespeare's life and character, it must result from a careful and profound study of these Sonnets. Frederic Schlegel has observed, that' it is in these pieces that we are first introduced to a personal knowledge

B 2

[ocr errors]
« ZurückWeiter »