Изображения страниц


[merged small][ocr errors]

THE Passionate Pilgrim was first published by William Jag. gard in small octavo in 1599, with our author's name. Two of the Sonnets inserted in that collection are also found (as has been already observed) in the larger collection printed in quarto in 1609; which having been already laid before the reader, (see before, Sonnet 138, and 144,) are here omitted. J. Jaggard in 1598 had printed a collection of Poems written by Richard Barnefield. Among these are found A Sonnet " addressed to his friend Maister R. L. in praise of musique and poetrie," beginning with this line, “ If musique and sweete poetrie agree," &c. and an Ode also written by Barnefield, of which the first line is “ As it fell upon a day-:" notwithstanding which, William Jaggard inserted these two pieces in the Passionate Pilgrim as the productions of Shakspeare.

In the year 1612 he went still further, for he then added to the former miscellany several pieces written by Thomas Heywood, and re-published the Collection under the following title: “The passionate Pilgrime, or certaine Amorous Sonnets betweene Venus and Adonis, newly corrected and augmented. By W. Shakespeare. The third edition. Whereunto is newly added two love-epistles, the first from Paris to Hellen, and Hellens answere backe againe to Paris." Heywood, being much offended with this proceeding, appears to have insisted on the printer's cancelling the original title-page, and substituting another that should not ascribe the whole to Shakspeare. This I learn from my copy of these poems, in which the two title-pages by the fortunate negligence of the binder have been preserved: one with, and the other without, the name of our author. Heywood in his postscript to his Apology for Actors, printed in 1612, thus speaks of this transaction : “ Here likewise I must necessarily insert a manifest injury done to me in that worke, [Britaynes Troy,] by taking the two epistles of Paris to Helen, and Helen to Paris, and printing them in a less volume under the name of another ; which may put the world in opinion I might steale them from him, and hee, to do himselfe right, hath since published them in his own name : but as I must acknowledge my lines not worthy his patronage under whom he hath published them, so, the author, I know, much offended with Mr. Jaggard, that (altogether unknown to him,) presumed to make so bold with his name.”

In consequence of Jaggard's conduct the two pocms of Barne

field have till the present edition been printed as Shakspeare's; and Heywood's translations from Ovid, notwithstanding the author's remonstrance, were again republished in 1640, under the name of our poet : nor was the fallacy detected till the year 1766, when it was pointed out by Dr. Farmer in his very inge. nious Essay on the Learning of Shakspeare.

Beside the poems already enumerated, which the printer falsely ascribed to Shakspeare, he likewise inserted a celebrated Madrigal written by Marlowe, beginning with the words—“ Come live with me, and be my love,” which is now rejected.

The title-page above given fully supports an observation I made some years ago, that several of the sonnets in this collection seem to have been essays of the author when he first conceived the notion of writing a poem on the subject of Venus and Adonis, and before the scheme of his work was completely adjusted.

Many of these little pieces bear the strongest mark of the hand of Shakspeare. I have not adhered to the order in which they stand in the old copy, having classed all those which relate to Adonis together. MALONE.

Why the present collection of Sonnets, &c. should be entitled The Passionate Pilgrim, I cannot discover, as it is made up out of the loose fragments of Shakspeare, together with pieces of other writers. Perhaps it was so called by its first editor William Jaggard the bookseller. We may be almost sure that our author never designed the majority of these his unconnected scraps for the publick.

On the Stationers' books the following entry occurs : “Jan. 3, 1599, Amours by J. D. with certen Sonets by W. S.” This entry is made by Eleazar Edgar. Steevens.

So many instances have been given of Jaggard's want of fidelity in this publication, that I am afraid all confidence must be withdrawn from the whole. In addition to those poems which have been withdrawn by Mr. Malone as being the property of other writers, that which stands fourth in this edition may, upon equally good grounds, be added to the list, as it is found in a collection of Sonnets, by B. Griffin, entitled Fidessa more Chaste then Kinde, 1596, with some variations which I have pointed out in the notes. Fidessa was reprinted in the year 1815 by my friend Mr. Bliss. It will throw some additional doubt upon Mr. Malone's conjecture, that the little pieces which he has thrown together at the beginning were “ essays of the author, when he first conceived the notion of writing a poem upon the subject of Venus and Adonis." Mr. Malone, indeed, has himself, at the end of that poem, pro

duced several instances of the same topick being treated by : preceding writers.

In Jaggard's edition of 1612 a distinction seems to be drawn between some of these poems and others, which are separated from them by a fresh title-page :

To sundry notes of Musick.

This second class contains the following

1 It was a lordings daughter
2 Oh a day alack the day
3 My flocks feed not
4 When as thine eye hath chose the dame
5 Live with me and be my love
6 As it fell upon a day

Here (we may observe) two of the poems not written by Shakspeare are found, namely, No. 5 and 6; and from thence we might at first infer that the first class belonged to him, and that the second, like Heywood's translations, was added, to fill up the volume, from other sources ; for I cannot but consider No. 1, as totally unworthy of our poet, and Nos. 3 and 4 appear to me to be of an older cast than his writings, or those of his immediate contemporaries, and bear a nearer resemblance to the style of those uncertain authors, whose poems are attached to Surreys, in Tottell's edition. But unfortunately this second part contains No. 2, which is perhaps the only unquestionable production of Shakspeare in the volume, and in the first we find the poem in praise of musick and poetry, which is claimed for Barnefield. If we are not to consider the Passionate Pilgrim altogether as a bookseller's trick, I know not why this last-mentioned composition is to be surrendered without a question. If William Jaggard was a rogue, John Jaggard may not have been much better, and may have stolen Shakspeare's verses, which were afterwards restored to their rightful owner. I should be glad if I could claim them with more confidence for our great poet, not on account of their merit, which is small, but as showing his admiration of Spenser, and the warm terms in which he expressed it. As Barnefield's poems are not easily met with, I shall add this little piece :

“ If Musick and sweet Poetry agree,

“ As they must needs, the Sister and the Brother, “ Then must the love be great 'twixt you and me,

“ Because thou lov'st the one, and I the other : Dowland to thee is dear, whose heavenly touch

“ Upon the lute doth ravish human sense ; “ Spenser to me, whose deep conceit is such

“As, passing all conceit, needs no defence.

“ Thou lov'st to hear the sweet melodious sound

« That Phæbus'lute (the queen of musick) makes ; “ And I in deep delight am chiefly drown'd

“ When as himself to singing he betakes :

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »