ignorance, perhaps misunderstood the begetter" or obtainer, and attributed the whole series to him, instead, perhaps, of some half a dozen. He ac cordingly mingled them all together under one head, and occasioned that inextricable confusion which has since been the cause of so much painful and despairing research. If Shakspeare had had anything to do with the edition, I think he would have dedicated the work in an open manner to his faithful friend and munificent patron (his earliest and latest) Lord Southampton, and that he would have taken care so to divide and arrange the Sonnets, and to indicate the subjects, as to have made them intelligible to the reader. As they now stand, abstracting their poetical merit, they are nothing but a painful puzzle. It is perhaps worth while observing that the evidently authentic editions of the Venus and Adonis and the Rape of the Lucrece were both dedicated to the same patron, Lord Southampton, and both published by the same bookseller, Richard Fielde; but the spurious edition of the Passionate Pilgrim was dedicated to no one, and published by Jaggard; and the (as I suppose) spurious edition of the Sonnets was dedicated to two initials, W. H., preceded by a Mr., and published by T. T. (Thomas Thorpe), who I suspect was a bookseller of "no very good repute.' It may be thought by some readers that I have entered into this discussion too minutely; but I confess that I have reluctantly checked myself from entering into a more elaborate consideration of what I esteem a highly interesting literary question. It is, I think, pretty evident, that, notwithstanding the extreme neglect which has hitherto attended these Sonnets, they are at last gradually emerging from their long obscurity. Within these last eight years several new editions have been published. In 1825 Mr. Pickering published an edition of Shakspeare's poems, but without a single note or comment, or a line of preface. Some time in 1831, Mr. Moxon (a young and enterprising publisher of great taste, and himself a writer of sonnets), published an edition of Shakspeare's and Milton's Sonnets, together in one volume. Mr. GENT. MAG. VOL. IV. Pickering, besides his edition of 1825, published, in 1832, an edition which is included in the Aldine edition of the British Poets, a very tasteful collection. Mr. Dyce's introductory memoir and criticisms are good, but not sufficiently elaborate and minute. His remarks on the Sonnets, though quite laudatory enough of their poetical merits, betray a want of care and research when he enters upon the difficult question I have just discussed. Shakspeare himself had a high opinion of his own Sonnets, which he appears to have thought would secure to himself and the several objects of them an immortal fame. And this is another reason why it is improbable that he had any concern in their publication; for, as it is clear that he intended to immortalize his friends, he would never have arranged the Sonnets in so obscure a style as to leave the objects of them to be guessed at. Shakspeare somewhere styles the Sonnet the 66 deep-brained Sonnet." Wordsworth says, "Scorn not the sonnet, Critic; you have frowned Mindless of its just honours; with this key Shakspeare unlocked his heart.” Throughout the whole series of Sonnets our great Poet makes not a single allusion to his dramas. It is well known that he superintended two separate editions of his Poems, but not one edition of his Plays. In fact he was best known by his minor poems, which were very popular. His two first poems went through six editions. in thirteen years; while, during the same period, Romeo and Juliet (his most popular play) passed through the press but twice. To end at once this long article, the following are the conclusions I have arrived at. The Sonnets are incorrectly arranged by an ignorant bookseller; they are addressed to several different individuals, male and female, in some cases real and in others imaginary; some of them are possibly written in the character of Lord Southampton to the "faire Mrs. Vernon" (afterwards his wife), and some in the character of that lady to her lover; some are written in the poet's own character; and perhaps some two or three of them are the roduction of an inferior pen. 3 B KINGSTON SEYMOUR MANOR-HOUSE, CO. SOMERSET. THIS interesting old mansion is of the age of Edward the Fourth, whose favourite badge, the rose-en-soleil, appears on the west gable. The manor was divided; but the resident lord, to whom the erection of the house may be ascribed, appears to have been one of the family of Kenn. This is one of the most perfect and interesting specimens of ancient domestic architecture in the county of Somerset. It is a small building, its extreme length not exceeding 67 feet. The hall occupies the centre, and is 28 ft. 6 in. long, by 18 ft. in width. It has a window on the north, and another on the south side; the latter appears between the porch and the bay, which is a square of seven feet and a half on the inside, and forms the only means of communication between the hall and the withdrawingroom, which occupies the western wing of the building, and is 24 feet in length by 13 ft. 6 in. in width. The staircase is attached to this room, and entered from it, on the north side. The eastern wing, which is 31 feet and a half in length, and 18 feet eight inches in width, including the thickness of the walls, is separated into two rooms, the front and larger portion of which was the kitchen. The room beyond does not seem to have been devoted to mean uses. It has no external doorway, and it is difficult to imagine where space was formerly found for the offices which must have originally belonged to this handsome residence. As it does not appear that any subordinate buildings were ever attached to it, it is reasonable to suppose that they were included in some building detached, but not far removed from the main edifice. There is no chimney-piece in the hall, so that we may conclude that the fire was kindled on a hearth in the centre of the room. The chimney-piece in the withdrawing room is of stone, and singularly ornamented, and the ceiling is of wood-work, handsomely panelled. The hall in this, as in the greater number of instances, has a lofty roof of timber, very finely constructed and of good proportions, but not distinguished by many ornaments. I should not, however, omit to notice a little window handsomely canopied, which appears high up in the wall at the west end. It opens into the spacious apartment over the withdrawing-room, and was sufficiently large to give the host a commanding view of his assembled guests. We must now speak of the exterior, which presents a highly decorated elevation towards the south. The west wing and the bay on one hand, and the north wing and the porch on the other, leave the hall deeply recessed in the centre, and their double gables rise so high as nearly to conceal the long line of its steep roof. The arch of the porch, and the upper windows in the wings, are distinguished by Pointed arches. All the other windows have square tops, with very highly enriched tracery. The windows differ in size; several have transoms and several are without, but the whole appear with their original ornaments complete. The masonry and construction of this house are good and perfect. It is now the property of John Hugh Smyth Pigott, of Brockley Hall, Esq. and will be henceforth preserved with the care it merits. The following particulars are entered in the parish register of Kingston Seymour, and dated 1727, by Mr. James Tuthill, then Rector. "Kingston, the manor and estate of John de Burgh, grandson of the great Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent, who leaving only three daughters and heirs, Hawise, Dervergild, and Margery, this manor and his other estates was parted between them; and Dervergild, who married Robert Fitzwalter, had this lordship for part of her share. It did not come to the said John from his ancestors, but as he was heir to Hawise de Llanvalley, his grandmother, upon failure of issue in that family. John de Kingston, who seems to have taken his name from his lordship, which was his seat, was Knight of this county and Dorsetshire in the 6th and 12th years of the reign of King Edward the Third." This curious document is imperfect. B. MEMORIALS OF LITERARY CHARACTERS.-No. IX. LETTER FROM HUGH LORD POLWARTH, AFTERWARDS EARL OF MARCHMONT, TO AARON HILL, ESQ.* I RECEIVED your letter, Sir, with the same sensation that one receives an excuse from a friend for whom one has waited several hours. The excuse is very kind; but as the pleasure which the friend himself would give, often consists in some degree in what one has to say to him, nothing he can say can atone for the being disappointed of saying what one had to say to him. I did expect you in town with great impatience, so long as I imagined you was on the road; and when I learnt that you had put off your journey, I submitted to it as I do to the frost, or Sir John Eyles's curiosity, which renders the invention of letters useless or dangerous. I had a great deal to say to you, and nothing to say to him. And by what I could say, that he might see, I knew I could add nothing to your entertainment; for assurances of my constant admiration, gratitude, and respect, I knew, or I hoped, were unnecessary. But I will not now particularize to him the reasons why I did not write to you. I heard of you with great pleasure from several of your friends who took the pleasure of writing to you; and who had the charity in this hard weather to load you with their farthings; but as I knew you had a flame within, the warmth of which has often animated me, and the light of it directed me, I thought it the wisest part I could take to keep my copper to myself. Could I have sent you a letter 1 have lately received from the Forest, I would have done it from mere vanity, or would do it now to explain to you what you enquire after in the beginning of your letter. One must be very insensible to the love of society not to make the approbation of such as you and him a principal motive of action; or one must have very low views indeed, where that approbation will not be a principal instrument to obtain one's end. But if the end proposed be not low, be not wages, be not money to hoard or to squan * From Mr. Long's Transcripts; see p. 146. + That is, from Pope. EDIT. der, what can it be so properly as the approbation and good will of those, whose opinion every man is determined by, and whose voice bespeaks merit. Ambition and vanity are both gratified by it. One sees it in the behaviour of others, and one feels a pleasure in that phrase of Tully-" virtutes sine virtute assecuti sunt, sed tantorum virorum studia sine virtute nemo assecutus est." You will easily perceive why this sentence struck me so much. To find a foundation for one's vanity without oneself is the task of most men, to rest upon so sure a foundation for it as I do has been the lot of few. No wonder, then, if I am covetous of preserving it; if knowing the penetration and virtue of the men, I take more pains than others to preserve the foundation on which I rest, a stranger in this country this day was seven years, and at present a friend to the most (if not the only) valuable men in it. So far now from wondering, as you flattering do, I dare say you will not be surprised that I think of retiring, like the bears in the cold weather, after pampering myself during the sunshine, to hide myself in a northern den, and suck my paws to subsist my vanity upon, or that I should follow the example of your Horatian lord mayor's horse-" ne ilia ducat." I dare not even here [blank] you a receipt in full, there is so much more matter in your three lines than in his six pages, that even from a spirit of œconomy which he is possessed with for carrying on the War, he would never forgive you. Besides, the last time I saw him he rail'd at wit for two hours to Lady Hervey, which I told him was cruel, since no doubt he supposed she had none, or he would have been civiller to one of her qualifications. Perhaps he was angry at you for not answering him, as he is at me for not communicating to him a pamphlet, which he says you have wrote upon my furnishing you with materials. I am, with the greatest truth, Sir, your most obliged, faithful, humble servant, POLWARTH. London, 19th Jan. 1739-40. |