to that in which Shakspeare had ridiculed him and others, in what Habington aptly calls a work of mystic ideas and exaggeration.

Shakespeare's Sonnets seem not to have been in much request in the life-time of the poet, except amongst the few "private friends," they being of too enigmatical a nature for the general public; and it was not till 1640, twenty-four years after his death, and ten years after that of his patron friend, that a second edition appeared. This edition was altogether in a different form; it had then blended with it the "Passionate Pilgrim" and the songs from the Plays. It was compiled by John Benson, and printed by Thomas Cotes, the printer of the second folio of our author's dramatic works, 1632. The poems are arranged in little groups, the original sequence being broken up, and even the closest connected Sonnets are separated. The whole is, in fact, rearranged, or rather disarranged. The groups have headings, such as the "Glory of Beauty," "A Masterpiece," "Loss and Gain," "Love's Cruelty," &c. He places first the 67th and 68th, as if to indicate that the collection was of a satirical nature, and to denote unmistakably the sex addressed, which in these instances is especially revealed, as it is in other Sonnets purposely concealed. He has also omitted to insert the 18th, 19th, 43rd, 56th, 75th, and 76th. His object in selecting these for expulsion is obviously on account of Shakespeare having in these instances not only frequently repeated the thoughts of other Sonnets, but almost the very words also. These omissions appear not to have been detected hitherto, on account of his arrangement being unnum

bered. The line in Sonnet 108, which stands thus in the original

"Nothing, sweet boy; and yet like prayers divine,"

is altered to

"Nothing, sweet love, and yet like prayers divine.”

But that which is most singular is his Preface to the Reader, which has never been reprinted, and is as follows:

"TO THE READER.

“I here presume, under favour, to present to your view some excellent and sweetly composed poems of Master William Shakespeare, which in themselves appear of the same purity the author himself, then living, avouched. They had not the fortune, by reason of their infancy in his death, to have the due accommodation of proportionable glory with the rest of his everliving works. Yet the lines will afford you a more authentic approbation than my assurance any way can to invite your allowance; in your perusal you shall find them serene, clear, and elegantly plain,-such gentle strains as shall recreate and not perplex your brain. No intricate or cloudy stuff to puzzle intellect, but perfect eloquence, such as will raise your admiration to his praise. This assurance will not differ from your acknowledgments, and certain I am my opinion will be seconded by the sufficiency of these ensuing lines. I have been somewhat solicitous to bring this forth to the perfect view of all men, and in so doing glad to be serviceable for the continuance of glory to the deserved author in these his poems." There appears something ironical in this. It is the reverse, not only as to the Sonnets, but also to Shakespeare's opinion of what this species of verse should be, as when extolling them he applies to them the epithet "deepbrained," not only as their characteristic, but their highest merit.

Benson appends a poem to the preface, which gives testimony that they were the known effusions of the poet's mature years. The bard is thus addressed :

"These learned poems amongst thine after birth

That makes thy name immortal on the earth."

Both the laudatory lines and the irreconcileable preface,

from which the above are taken, exhibit plainly that not only the general public, but also the personal acquaintances of Shakespeare were mystified. It is a curious piece of information that the author, when living, vindicated the poems: that he upon some occasions avouched their purity, possibly from the attacks of those who only condemned that which they had not understood. Renson, it is evident, could not understand them; this led him to break the poem up into parts, which makes the matter worse; but viewing them as pure, crediting Shakespeare's testimony, he feigns to see them so. It is somewhat to our theory that we arrive at the same conclusion Shakespeare himself avouched, and to which his life bore testimony.

The question now arises why Benson omitted the Dedication, broke up the poems into such complete disorder, and caused by inappropriate headings such general confusion. The solution is that he did not understand them, nor did he know any other who did. He might have known, if only from hearsay, that they were dedicated to Lord Herbert in the poet's life-time, but how to apply the contents to either poet or patron was past his comprehension. Lord Herbert, at this date, had been dead ten years, and with him the secret to have introduced the Dedication again would have been the height of impropriety, or even to mention it, after having confounded its application. He hoped, as others have since done, by ignoring the Dedication and destroying the continuity, to pass the poems off as the essence of simplicity; but words are words, and can only be explained by the right explanation.

Joshua Poole, in 1677, appears the next who sought by alteration to convey a different meaning. In the above year he published his " English Parnassus." In the compilation he made numerous extracts from the Plays of Shakespeare, and also inserted many passages from the Sonnets, which he headed with titles, and the passages themselves are altered. In this particular he went a step beyond the 1640 editor. To the extracts from the first five Sonnets he gives the title of the "Resolved Fair Virgin," totally disregarding that Shakespeare meant bachelor; the sex is altered from "him" and "his" to "her" and "she."

INTRODUCTION.

"His was an age of fantastic conceits, and he more or less partook of its spirit."-Ferguson's Hist. of Englaud, p. 140, Article on Shakespeare.

The Sonnets have been objected to on account of their being filled with fantastical conceits. They are pictures for and of the age. In this burlesque Shakespeare has not only used the conceits, but also purposely imitated the style of others, and while doing so, emulated to surpass them in their own sphere. As it was the custom for Sonnetteers to use biblical expressions, Shakespeare in imitation of them has also used them, so that it was not on account of his being fortunate enough to find that rarity, a true friend, that led him to lavish such excesses in his verse; for the object of these excesses, as will be proved, was parody. He did find such a friend, who excelled, he asserts, the female friends of other poets; one to whom he might exclaim, with his own philosophical Hamlet :

"Since my dear soul was mistress of her choice,

And could of men distinguish, her election

Hath seal'd thee for herself."

And it is but natural to suppose that, having found such a friend, he would speak in high terms of him, as he was