bore no resemblance to his mother (II. 9); his life was active, with varying fortunes, to which allufions might be looked for in the Sonnets, fuch as may be found in the verses of his other poet, Daniel. Further, it appears from the punning Sonnets (CXXXV. and CXLIII., fee Notes), that the Chriftian name of Shakfpere's friend was the fame as his own, Will, but Wriothesley's name was Henry. To Herbert the punning

Sonnets and the 'Mr. W. H.' of the dedication can be made to apply. He was indeed a nobleman in 1609, but a nobleman might be styled Mr.; Lord Buckhurft is entered as M. Sackville in England's Parnaffus' (Minto); or the Mr. may have been meant to disguise the truth. Herbert was beautiful; was like his illuftrious mother; was brilliant, accomplished, licentious; 'the most universally beloved and esteemed', fays Clarendon, of any man of his age'. Like Southampton he was a patron of poets, and he loved the theatre. In 1599 attempts were unfuccefffully made to induce him to become a fuitor for the hand of the Lord Admiral's

daughter. So far the balance leans towards Herbert. But his father lived until 1601 (fee XIII. and Notes); Southampton's father died while his fon was a boy; and the date of Herbert's birth (1580), taken in connection with Meres's mention of Sonnets, and the Two loves' of the Paffionate Pilgrim Sonnet (1599), CXLIV., may well cause a doubt.

A clue, which promises to lead us to clearness, and then deceives us into deeper twilight, is the characterisation (LXXVIII.-LXXXVI.) of a rival poet who for a time fupplanted Shakfpere in his patron's regard. This rival, the 'better spirit' of LXXX., was learned (LXXVIII.); dedicated a book to Shakspere's patron (LXXXII. and Notes); celebrated his beauty and knowledge (LXXXII.); in hymns' (LXXXV.); was remarkable for the full proud fail of his great verfe' (LXXXVI., LXXX.); was taught by spirits' to write above a mortal pitch', was nightly vifited by an affable familiar ghost' who 'gulled him with intelligence' (LXXXVI.). Here are allufions and characteristics which ought to lead to identifica

tion. Yet in the end we are forced to confefs that the poet remains as dim a figure as the patron.

Is it Spenfer? He was learned, but what ghoft was that which gulled him? Is it Marlowe? His verfe was proud and full, and the creator of Fauftus may well have had dealings with his own Mephistophelis, but Marlowe died in May 1593, the year of Venus & Adonis. Is it Drayton, or Nash, or John Davies of Hereford? Perfons in fearch of an ingeniously improbable opinion may choose any one of these. Is it Daniel? Daniel's reputation ftood high; he was regarded as a mafter by Shakspere in his early poems; he was brought up at Wilton, the feat of the Pembrokes, and in 1601 he infcribed his Defence of Ryme to William Herbert; the Pembroke family favoured aftrologers, and the ghoft that gulled Daniel may have been the fame that gulled Allen, Sandford, and Dr. Dee, and through them gulled Herbert. Here is at leaft a clever guess, and Boaden is again the gueffer. But Profeffor Minto makes a guess

even more fortunate. No Elizabethan poet wrote ampler verse, none scorned 'ignorance' more, or more haughtily afferted his learning than Chapman. In The Tears of Peace (1609), Homer as a spirit visits and inspires him; the claim to such inspiration may have been often made by the tranflator of Homer in earlier years. Chapman was pre-eminently the poet of Night. 'The Shadow of Night', with the motto Verfus mei habebunt aliquantum Noctis, appeared in 1594; the title-page describes it as containing two poeticall Hymnes'. In the dedication Chapman affails unlearned paffion-driven men', 'hide-bound with affection to great men's fancies', and ridicules the alleged eternity of their 'idolatrous platts for riches'. 'Now what a fupererogation in wit this is, to think Skill fo mightily pierced with their loves, that she should prostitutely show them her fecrets, when she will scarcely be looked upon by others, but with invocation, fafting, watching; yea not without having drops of their fouls like a heavenly famiiar'. Of Chapman's Homer a part appeared

in 1596; dedicatory fonnets in a later edition are addreffed to both Southampton and Pembroke.

Mr. W. H., the only begetter of the Sonnets, remains unknown. Even the meaning of the word 'begetter' is in difpute. 'I have fome coufin-germans at court', writes Decker in Satiromaftix, 'shall beget you the reversion of the mafter of the king's revels', where beget evidently means procure. Was the 'begetter' of the Sonnets, then, the person who procured them for Thorpe? I cannot think fo; there is special point in the choice of the word 'begetter', if the dedication be addressed to the perfon who inspired the poems and for whom they were written. Eternity through offspring is what Shakspere moft defires for his friend; if he will not beget a child, then he is promised eternity in verfe by his poet,-in verse 'whose influence is thine, and born of thee' (LXXVIII.). Thus was Mr. W. H. the begetter of these poems, and from the point of view of a complimentary dedication he might well be termed the only begetter.