ble that he should have been addressed by Shakespeare in such lines as the following? "Thou, that art now the world's fresh ornament, And only herald to the gaudy spring." "Against that time, if ever that time come, When I shall see thee frown on my defects, When as thy love hath cast his utmost sum, Against that time, when thou shalt strangely pass, The following passages evidently allude to one who was the observed of all observers, the object of more than one compli mentary Muse, and the patron of the learned. "So oft have I invoked thee for my muse, And found such fair assistance in my verse, As every alien pen hath got my use, And under thee their poetry disperse. Thine eyes, that taught the dumb on high to sing, And heavy ignorance aloft to fly, Have added feathers to the learned's wing, And given grace a double majesty." "And having thee, of all men's pride I boast.” " It is, I think, pretty clear, that "A Mr. Hughes" is not the who was person all men's pride,” and who gave grace a double majesty.” But if Tyrwhitt and Malone fell into the error of giving Shakespeare a patron and a subject somewhat too humble and obscure, Mr. George Chalmers has made a very opposite mistake, and in his anxiety to find a sufficiently dignified object for the poet's praise and gratitude has fixed upon royalty. itself. He insists upon it that the whole series of sonnets (154) is addressed to Queen Elizabeth! To those who are familiar with the sonnets, and the palpable indications of many of them being addressed to a male object, this opinion seems too ridiculous to be received with any other answer than a laugh. I have gone through the sonnets with great attention, to satisfy myself as to the sex of the object or objects of them, and the following are some of the many passages which I found glaringly opposed to the notion of Mr. Chalmers: "Look in thy glass, and tell the face thou viewest, Thou dost beguile the world, unbless some mother." Son. 3. With virtuous wish would bear you living flowers." Son. 16. "O carve not with thine hours my love's fair brow, And draw no lines there with thine antique pen; For beauty's pattern to succeeding men." Son. 19. "Lord of my love, to whom in vassalage—" Son. 26. "The region cloud hath masked him from me now, Son. 33. "Gentle thou art, and therefore to be won; Beauteous thou art, therefore to be assailed; Where thou art forced to break a two-fold truth; Her's by thy beauty tempting her to thee, Thine, by thy beauty being false to me." Son. 41. "Beauteous and lovely youth, When that shall fade, my verse distils your truth." Son. 44. "His beauty shall in these black lines be seen," Son. 63. "Ah! wherefore with imperfection should he live, Queen Elizabeth must have been an old woman (about 64) when she was thus addressed by Shakespeare, according to Mr. George Chalmers, as his "sweet boy !" The W. II. of the dedication, and the perpetual allusions to a male object, are no obstacles to our critic, who does not even hesitate to unser the Queen for the sake of his ingenious speculation. He supposes that the magculing phrases were addressed to her in her character of sove. reign! Some of the sonnets that have a female object are any thing but complimentary; and if they were really addressed to Elizabeth, either prove her majesty to have been a base and licentious woman, or William Shakespeare to have been guilty of a gross and malicious libel on a " Virgin Queen," "In nothing art thou black, save in thy deeds," "For I have sworn thee fair, and thought thee bright, "Oh ! how I love what others do abhor." He calls her also in different sonnets, his false plague," his "female evil," his colored ill," and accuses her of "seducing his friend," Absurd as is the conjecture of Mr. George Chalmers, there has been no want of mad or careless critics to keep him in coun VOL. 11. tenance. The early editors, Gildon and Sewell, both maintained that the whole collection is addressed to a female! Some of the commentators have been puzzled by the amatory character of the expressions unequivocally applied in many instances to a male object. But it should be remembered, that in the age of Shakespeare there was very little distinction between the ordinary expressions of love and friendship. The latter frequently bordered on the strongest language of the former. Warton observes, that in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, there were published entire sets of sonnets devoted to the record of a species of tender attachment beween male friends, which, though wholly free from any direct impurity of expression or open im modesty of sentiment, would not be tolerated in these days. He alludes, as an instance, to the "Affectionate Shepherde" of Richard Barnfielde, printed in 1595, in a series of twenty "not inelegant sonnets," which were exceedingly popular. The poet bewails his unsuccessful love for a beautiful youth, in "a strain of the most tender passion, yet with professions of the chastest affection." The meaning attached to the ardent phrases that are now confined to the intercourse of sexual passion, is not to be given by the modern reader to the same expressions in some of our elder writers. It will be generally admitted, however, that the revolution in our language in this respect is a very pleasant and proper one; and it cannot be denied that in too much of the poetry of the 15th and 16th centuries the effect of great originality, force, and beauty of imagery and thought, is often injured by the disagreeable feeling, bordering on disgust, with which we encounter expressions, that however customary and decorous in the olden time, have acquired an air of indelicacy in consequence of the great change that has since occurred in their meaning and their mode of application. Dr. Drake has entered into a very elaborate, and certainly a very ingenious and plausible disquisition, to prove that the first one hundred and twenty-six of the sonnets are addressed to Lord Southampton*. I think, however, that I have discovered various reasonable objections to this hypothesis. The first seventeen sonnets, which so strongly urge the poet's friend to marry, could scarcely have been addressed to Lord Southampton, because that nobleman, then not quite 22 years of age, assiduously courted Mrs. Vernon in 1595, (about 14 years before the sonnets were published, and three years before they were alluded to by Merest as being in private circulation amongst the poet's friends,) and he married her (his marriage having been delayed by the interference of Queen Elizabeth) in 1599. In the next place almost the only praise bestowed on the object of these sonnets is that of extra. ordinary beauty, and I do not recollect that Lord Southampton has been celebrated for the wonderful perfection of his face or person, though if his portrait in Malone's Shakespeare be authentic, he was not uncomely. His wit and learning, however, are indisputable, and were warmly eulogized by Chapman, Brothwate, Nash, and other contemporary writers; but throughout the 126 sonnets, supposed to be dedicated to his merits, it is remarkable that there are but two allusions to any mental qualities. The first of the following quotations almost implies a want of mind, or at all events that the world gave the object of the sonnet no credit for mental endowments, though his personal beauty was generally admitted. "Those parts of thee that the world's eye doth view, Want nothing that the thoughts of hearts can mend : He proposes to reverse the initials W. H. and make them stand for Henry Wriothe-ly, Earl of Southampton. + It is possible that Meres may have alluded to the sonnets in the Passionate Pilgrim, published in 1599. Leigh Hunt has fallen into a mistake, in supposing that the 154 sonnets were not published till after the poet's death. : His features were at all events masculine, but in the 20th sonnet the poet exclaims: "A woman's face, with nature's own hand painted, |