it

Dear son of memory, great heir of fame,

What need'st thou such dull witness of thy name?
Thou in our wonder and astonishment

Hast built thyself a lasting monument.

For whilst to th' shame of slow-endeavouring art
Thy easy numbers flow, and that each heart
Hath from the leaves of thy unvalued book
Those Delphic lines with deep impression took,
Then thou, our fancy of herself bereaving,
Dost make us marble with too much conceiving,
And so sepulchred in such pomp dost lie,
That kings for such a tomb would wish to die."

The author of these lines could not have known the works of the "admirable dramatic poet," while that poet was in life; but sixteen years after his death he was the dear son of memory, the great heir of fame; his bones were honoured, his relics were hallowed, his works were a lasting monument, his book was priceless, his lines were oracular, Delphic. Is this oblivion? But may be said that Milton was a young enthusiast, one who saw farther than the million; that the public opinion of a writer (and we are not talking of his positive excellence, apart from opinion) must be sought for in the voice of the people, or at any rate in that of the leaders of the people. How are we to arrive at the knowledge of this expression? We can only know, incidentally, that an author was a favourite, either of a king or of a cobbler. We know that Shakspere was the favourite of a king, in these times of his oblivion. A distinguished writer says, "The Prince of

Wales had learned to appreciate Shakspere, not originally from reading him, but from witnessing the court representations of his plays at Whitehall. Afterwards we know that he made Shakspere his closet companion, for he was reproached with doing so by Milton."* The concluding words

are founded upon a mistake of the passage in Milton. Charles is not reproached with reading Shakspere. The great republican does not condemn the king for having made the dramatic poet the closet companion of his solitudes; but, speaking of the dramatic poet as a well-known author with whom the king was familiar, he cites out of him a passage to show that pious words might be found in the mouth of a tyrant. The passage not only proves the familiarity of Charles with Shakspere, but it evidences also Milton's familiarity; and, what is of more importance, the familiarity even of those stern and ascetic men to whom Milton was peculiarly addressing his opinions. The passage of the "Iconoclastes" is as follows: "Andronicus Comnenus, the Byzantine emperor, though a most cruel tyrant, is reported by Nicetas to have been a constant reader of Saint Paul's epistles; and by continual study had so incorporated the phrase and style of that transcendent apostle into all his familiar letters, that the imitation seemed to vie with the original. Yet this availed not to deceive the

* Mr. De Quincey's "Life of Shakespeare" in the Encyclopædia Britannica."

people of that empire, who, notwithstanding his saint's vizard tore him to pieces for his tyranny. From stories of this nature, both ancient and modern, which abound, the poets also, and some English, have been in this point so mindful of decorum as to put never more pious words in the mouth of any person than of a tyrant. I shall not instance an abstruse author, wherein the king might be less conversant, but one whom we well know was the closet companion of these his solitudes, William Shakespeare, who introduces the person of Richard the Third, speaking in as high a strain of piety and mortification as is uttered in any passage of this book *, and sometimes to the same sense and purpose with some words in this place I intended,' saith he, not only to oblige my friends, but my enemies." The like saith Richard, Act 11., Scene 1.

'I do not know that Englishman alive

With whom my soul is any jot at odds,
More than the infant that is born to-night;
I thank my God for my humility.'

Other stuff of this sort may be read throughout the whole tragedy, wherein the poet used not much licence in departing from the truth of history, which delivers him a deep dissembler, not of his affections only, but of religion." It was a traditionary blunder, which Warton received and transmitted to his successors, that

*Milton here refers to the first section of the "Eikon Basilike."

Milton reproached Charles with reading Shakspere, and thus inferred that Shakspere was no proper closet companion. The passage has wholly the contrary tendency; and he who thinks otherwise may just as well think that the phrase "other stuff of this sort" is also used disparagingly.

A few years before — that is in 1645- Milton had offered another testimony to Shakspere in his "L'Allegro," then published:

"Then to the well-trod stage anon,
If Jonson's learned sock be on,

Or sweetest Shakespeare, Fancy's child,
Warble his native wood-notes wild."

Milton was not afraid to publish these lines, even
after the suppression of the theatres by his own
political party. That he went along with them
in their extreme polemical opinions it is impos..
sible to believe; but he would nevertheless be
careful not to mention, in connexion with the
stage, names of any doubtful eminence.
He was
not ashamed to say that the learning of Jonson,
the nature of Shakspere, had for him attractions,
though the stage was proscribed. This contrast
of the distinguishing qualities of the two men is
held to be one amongst the many proofs of Shak-
spere's want of learning; as if it was not abso-
lutely essential to the whole spirit and conception
of the passage that the learning of Jonson, thus
pointed out as his leading quality, should be con-
trasted with the higher quality of Shakspere
that quality which was assigned him as the

""

greatest praise by his immediate contemporaries his nature. No one can doubt of Milton's affection for Shakspere, and of his courage in avowing that affection, living as he was in the heat of party opinion which was hostile to all such excellence. We have simply "Jonson's learned sock; but the "native wood-notes wild" of Shakspere are associated with the most endearing expressions. He is "sweetest Shakespear," he is "Fancy's child.” In his later years, after a life of contention and heavy responsibility, Milton still clung to his early delights. The "Theatrum Poetarum," which bears the name of his nephew Edward Phillips, is held to have received many touches from Milton's pen.* At any rate it is natural that it should represent Milton's opinions. It is not alone what is here said of Shakspere, but of Shakspere in comparison with the other great dramatic poets of his age, that is important. Take a few examples:

"BENJAMIN JONSON, the most learned, judicious, and correct, generally so accounted, of our English comedians, and the more to be admired for being so, for that neither the height of natural parts, for he was no Shakespear, nor the cost of extraordinary education, for he is reported but a bricklayer's son, but his own proper industry and addiction to books, advanced him to this perfec tion in three of his comedies, namely, The

The "Theatrum Poetarum" was published in 1675,

the year after Milton's death.