The Entire Printed History of the Oxfordian Movement in a Single Volume

Our friend and colleague James A. Warren has done an amazing job, performing a real and lasting service, with his latest updating of AN INDEX TO OXFORDIAN PUBLICATIONS. What Jim has accomplished is impossible to describe in terms of the work — the hours, the labor, the care for detail and accuracy and thoroughness — that he has put into it. Here, folks, is the history of the Oxford case in print, from earliest records to now. And I predict that one day every college library, along with most if not all public libraries, will have at least one paper copy on hand along with a well-used link to the kind of interactive searching that Bill Boyle is providing by means of his New England Shakespeare Oxford Library’s SOAR catalogue.  Boyle’s announcement contains the following:

index-to-oxfordian-publications-cover-thumbnail-resized_2The Third Edition of An Index To Oxfordian Publications is now available on amazon.com ($39.95). and for a special discounted price ($30.00) at The New England Shakespeare Oxford Library Bookstore (sample pages are also available at the Bookstore site). This latest edition is 50% larger than the 2nd Edition (2013), with two thousand new listings having been added, for a total of more than 6,500 listings. In addition to updating the Index with the most recent publications from Oxfordian societies, the 3rd Edition also includes new sections on worldwide reviews and commentary on the Oxfordian theory that expands its already extensive coverage of all Oxfordian publications since the 1920s, and a selected bibliography of books.

The Index’s Oxfordian periodical coverage includes currently published titles (The Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter, The De Vere Society Newsletter, Brief Chronicles and The Oxfordian) through the end of 2014, plus full coverage of all past publications from both independent Oxfordian publishers and older Oxfordian societies, such as The Shakespeare Fellowship Newsletters (both the English and American branches, 1930s to 1950s), Shakespeare Matters, The Elizabethan Review, The Spear-Shaker Review, The Edward de Vere Newsletter, The Shakespearean Authorship Review, and The Bard.

The major new section in the Index includes more than 1,000 articles from 200 non-Oxfordian publications that have reviewed and commented on the Oxfordian theory, including the regular Oxfordian columns that appeared in Louis Marder’s Shakespeare Newsletter (1979-1991) and in The Shakespeare Pictorial (1929-1939). Other articles indexed range from ones in The New York Times, Times Literary Supplement, Shakespeare Quarterly, Notes & Queries, etc. to numerous other commercial and literary publications (large and small) from around the world.

James A. Warren

James A. Warren

And finally, the Index has also been expanded to include an extensive, selected bibliography of Oxfordian or Oxfordian-related books, along with selected non-Oxfordian books on the Shakespeare authorship question in general. The 350 listings in the new book section include both nonfiction commentary and criticism, and also fictional works inspired by the Shakespeare authorship question, particularly the Oxfordian theory.

Editor James Warren is owed an enormous thank you from all Oxfordians (and all Shakespeareans, for that matter) for his tireless work in compiling the original Index in 2011-12, and for expanding on it over these past three years, to where it is now the definitive “go to” resource for any questions about past Oxfordian scholarship.

The next step, as Warren notes in his Introduction, is providing subject access to all this material, and providing copies of the articles themselves to anyone who wants to read them. This is the mission of The New England Shakespeare Oxford Library’s SOAR Catalog, which presently includes approximately 80% of what is in the 3rd Edition of the Index, and by the end of 2015 will include 100%, plus the beginnings of extensive subject access and access to the articles themselves.

The Darkness of the Dark Lady is Metaphorical: “THEREFORE My Mistress’ Eyes are Raven Black”

The darkness of the Dark Lady in the Shakespeare sonnets has nothing to do with her physical coloring — nothing to do with her hair or eyes or skin. It’s a metaphor! The so-called Dark Lady series begins with Sonnet 127, in which the operative word is THEREFORE” in line 9 – as in “Therefore my Mistress’ eyes are Raven black,/ Her eyes so suited, and they mourners seem …” The failed Essex Rebellion of 8 February 1601 has just taken place and Southampton is now confined in the Tower, the bird of which is the Raven.

Elizabeth I by Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger 1595

Elizabeth I by Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger 1595

The woman, Queen Elizabeth, is pictured attending a funeral – not literally, of course. It’s figurative! It’s the funeral of any hope for the perpetuation of the Tudor dynasty — the same funeral depicted by the Earl of Oxford in “The Phoenix and Turtle,” to be published later in the same year as by “William Shake-speare” (yes, hyphenated). The blackness and darkness are metaphorical! And such is the case all through the Dark Lady series (127-152). Here are notes from The Monument for the opening sonnet:

THE DARK LADY: ELIZABETH: REBELLION & IMPRISONMENT
Sonnet 127
Beauty’s Successive Heir
8 February 1601

This opening sonnet to and about Queen Elizabeth is the start of the separate Dark Lady series, running in parallel with the Fair Youth series from 1601 to 1603. Two verses of this series, Sonnets 138 and 144, were first published in 1599; but Oxford has inserted them with slight but significant revisions into this sequence. The result is a series of twenty-six sonnets (127-152) matching the twenty-six sonnets of the opening series (1-26), each flanking the series of exactly one hundred verses (Sonnets 27-126) forming the center of the one hundred and fifty-two sonnet structure. Sonnet 127 corresponds in time to Sonnet 27 – the night of Southampton’s revolt and imprisonment on February 8, 1601 – both introducing “black” into their respective sequences.

In the past the royal son was “fair” but now he is “black” with disgrace, although he remains the Queen’s “successive heir” to the throne. Elizabeth’s imperial viewpoint determines everything. At a glance, she can turn him from “fair” (royal) to “black” (disgraced). She continues to slander her own “beauty” or royal blood, which is possessed by her son, by viewing him with “a bastard shame” or consigning him to the status of a royal bastard.

Sonnet 127

1- In the old age black was not counted fair,
2- Or if it were it bore not beauty’s name:
3- But now is black beauty’s successive heir,
4- And Beauty slandered by a bastard shame,
5- For since each hand hath put on Nature’s power,
6- Fairing the foul with Art’s false borrowed face,
7- Sweet beauty hath no name, no holy bow’r,
8- But is profaned, if not lives in disgrace.
9- Therefore my Mistress’ eyes are Raven black,
10 Her eyes so suited, and they mourners seem,
11 At such who not born fair no beauty lack,
12 Sland’ring Creation with a fasle esteem.
13 Yet so they mourn becoming of their woe,
14 That every tongue says beauty should look so.

1 – IN THE OLD AGE BLACK WAS NOT COUNTED FAIR
OLD AGE = former times; as in Sonnets 1 – 26 up to the year 1600, before the Essex Rebellion, after which everything changed; OLD = “Wherefore, not as a stranger but in the old style” – Oxford to Robert Cecil, May (?) 1601; “For truth is truth, though never so old” – Oxford to Robert Cecil, May 7, 1603; “That I might see what the old world could say” – Sonnet 59, line 9; “O him she stores, to show what wealth she had/ In days long since, before these last so bad” – Sonnet 67, lines 13-14, “Robbing no old to dress his beauty new” – Sonnet 68, line 12; “For as the Sun is daily new and old,/ So is my love still telling what is told” – Sonnet 76, lines 13-14; “Counting no old thing old, thou mine, I thine” – Sonnet 108, line 7; AGE = “A generation of men, a particular period of time; the period of life at which a person has arrived; a stage of life” – Schmidt; “Had my friend’s Muse grown with this growing age” – Sonnet 32, line 10; “The rich proud cost of outworn buried age” – Sonnet 64, line 2; “Doubting the filching age will steal his treasure” – Sonnet 75, line 6; “For fear of which, hear this, thou age unbred” – Sonnet 104, line 13; “And peace proclaims Olives of endless age” – Sonnet 107, line 8; “The age is grown so picked that the toe of the peasant comes so near the heel of the courtier he galls his kibe” – Hamlet, 5.1.138-140

essex-trial-report1.jpg

BLACK = Southampton, in disgrace for treason; “It will help me nothing to plead mine innocence, for that dye is on me which makes my whitest part black” – Henry VIII, 1.1.208-209; also, as royal bastard; “A joyless, dismal, black and sorrowful issue” – Titus Andronicus, 4.2.68-73; COUNTED FAIR = accounted (i.e., his “fair” or royal blood as Elizabeth’s “treasure”) or acknowledged as royal; “From fairest creatures we desire increase” – Sonnet 1, line 1

2 – OR IF IT WERE IT BORE NOT BEAUTY’S NAME
Or even if he was accounted as royal (by me), he did not bear Elizabeth’s name (Tudor); BORE = heraldic, i.e., Southampton never bore his mother’s coat-of-arms; also related to his birth as a bastard; (“Before these bastard signs of fair were borne” – Sonnet 68, line 3); BEAUTY’S NAME = Elizabeth’s name, Tudor; i.e., he was never known as Prince Henry Tudor; (“That thereby beauty’s Rose might never die” – Sonnet 1, line 2)

3 – BUT NOW IS BLACK BEAUTY’S SUCCESSIVE HEIR
But now Southampton is Elizabeth’s immediate heir to the throne; BLACK = Southampton; BEAUTY’S = Elizabeth’s; SUCCESSIVE HEIR = one who deserves to succeed by virtue of inheritance; rightful claimant to a title; “Yet, by reputing of his high descent, as next the King he was successive heir” – 2 Henry VI, 3.148-49 (the only other Shakespeare usage of the phrase); “Plead my successive title with your swords; I am his first-born son that was the last that wore the diadem of Rome: then let my father’s honor live in me, nor wrong mine age with this indignity” – Titus Andronicus, 1.1.4-8; “To God, my king, and my succeeding issue” – Richard II, 1.3.20; “rightful heir to the crown” – 2 Henry VI, 1.3.26; “But as successively from blood to blood, your right of birth” – Richard III, 3.7.134-135; “O now let Richmond and Elizabeth, the true succeeders of each royal House, by God’s fair ordinance conjoin together, and let their heirs, God, if Thy will be so, enrich the time to come with smooth-faced peace” – Richard III, 5.5.29-33; “Richer than that which four successive kings in Denmark’s crown have worn” – Hamlet, 5.2.273-274; “No son of mine succeeding” – Macbeth, 3.1.63; “They labored to plant the rightful heir” – 1 Henry VI, 2.5.80

Southampton in the Tower of London 1601-1603

Southampton in the Tower of London 1601-1603

4 – AND BEAUTY SLANDERED WITH A BASTARD SHAME
BEAUTY = Elizabeth; also, her blood that Southampton possesses by inheritance of it as a “natural issue of her Majesty’s body”; SLANDERED = brought into “discredit, disgrace, or disrepute” – OED; “But once he slandered me with bastardy” – King John, 1.l.74; “With the attainder of his slanderous lips” – Richard II, 4.1.24; SLANDERED BY A BASTARD SHAME = shame or disgrace because of royal-bastard status; (“Thy issue blurred with needless bastardy” – Lucrece, 522; also “slander” as “to charge with, accuse of, a crime or offence” = OED., citing Scotland Council of 1579: “Persons slandered or suspect of treason”); same as “The region cloud hath masked him from me now” – Sonnet 33, line 12, i.e., Elizabeth Regina’s dark cloud of shame has covered and hidden her son; “For slander’s mark was ever yet the fair,/ The ornament of beauty is suspect,/ A crow that flies in heaven’s sweetest air” – Sonnet 70, lines 2-4; “this slander of his blood” – Richard II, 1.1.113; “And that he is a bastard, not thy son” – Richard II, 5.2.106; “Out, insolent! Thy bastard shall be king … My boy a bastard!” – King John, 2.1.122-129)

“I am a bastard, too: I love bastards. I am bastard begot, bastard instructed, bastard in mind, bastard in valour, in everything illegitimate. One bear will not bite another, and where should one bastard? Take heed: the quarrel’s most ominous to us – if the son of a whore fight for a whore, he tempts judgment. Farewell, bastard” – Troilus & Cressida, 5.7.18-32

5 – FOR SINCE EACH HAND HATH PUT ON NATURE’S POWER
HAND = the powerful hand of Elizabeth, the absolute monarch; “Upon my head they placed a fruitless crown, and put a barren scepter in my gripe, thence to be wrenched by an un-lineal hand, no son of mine succeeding” – Macbeth, 3.1.59-63; “I’ll claim that promise at your Grace’s hand” – to the King in Richard III, 3.1.197; EACH HAND = others who have sought Elizabeth’s favor; both of the Queen’s royal hands; “If Heaven will take the present at our hands” – the King in Richard III, 1.1.120; “A Woman’s face with nature’s own hand painted/ Hast thou, the Master Mistress of my passion” – Sonnet 20, lines 1-2; Southampton at birth was “sleeping by a Virgin hand disarmed” – Sonnet 154, line 8; “From hands of falsehood” – Sonnet 48, line 4; “With time’s injurious hand crushed and o’er-worn” – Sonnet 63, line 2; “Or what strong hand can hold his swift foot back?” – Sonnet 65, line 11; PUT ON = assumed the royal power of the monarch and acted with that power; “For he was likely, had he been put on, to have proved most royal” – Horatio, saying that Prince Hamlet would have been a superb king, in Hamlet, 5.2.404-405; “deaths put on by cunning and forced causes” – Hamlet, 5.2.394; NATURE’S POWER = Elizabeth’s royal power as absolute monarch, whose imperial viewpoint can turn fair to black or vice versa; “O Thou my lovely Boy, who in thy power … If Nature, sovereign mistress over wrack” – Sonnet 126, lines 1, 5

Robert Cecil was holding Southampton in the Tower until the Queen died and King James succeeded her, thereby keeping his own power behind the throne

Robert Cecil was holding Southampton in the Tower until the Queen died and King James succeeded her, thereby keeping his own power behind the throne

6 – FAIRING THE FOUL WITH ART’S FALSE BORROWED FACE
Giving royal favor to foul persons by her false estimation; turning truth into falsity; “To make me give the lie to my true sight/ And swear that brightness doth not grace the day?/ Whence hast thou this becoming of things ill” – Sonnet 150, lines 3-4

7 – SWEET BEAUTY HATH NO NAME NO HOLY BOW’R
BEAUTY HATH NO NAME = Southampton’s royal blood from his mother, Elizabeth, is not acknowledged; NO HOLY BOW’R = no sacrosanct dwelling place, i.e., no right to sit on the throne as a god on earth

8 – BUT IS PROFANED, IF NOT LIVES IN DISGRACE
Instead she is profaned, because our son is now disgraced and imprisoned because of his role in the Rebellion; (Booth refers to “false identities that pass for real and real ones that seem false”); Southampton’s real identity as royal prince is hidden, so it seems false; PROFANED = defiled, usurped; “Question your royal thoughts, make the case yours, be now the father, and propose a son, hear your own dignity profaned” – Chief Justice to the newly crowned King Henry Fifth in 2 Henry IV, 5.3.91-93; IF NOT = or even; LIVES IN DISGRACE = lives in disgrace as a prisoner in the Tower of London

Ravens at the Tower of London

Ravens at the Tower of London

9 – THEREFORE MY MISTRESS’ EYES ARE RAVEN BLACK
THEREFORE = “Therefore” is the key word, i.e., the Queen’s eyes are not black in color, but rather reflect her dark point of view as absolute monarch; “therefore” the viewpoint of Elizabeth, my sovereign mistress, is black; ARE RAVEN BLACK = they are “therefore” black, because the Queen’s own viewpoint, casting its shadow, has turned Southampton from fair to black; her negative attitude has turned her into the so-called Dark Lady; “By heaven, thy love is black as ebony … O paradox! Black is the badge of hell” – the king in Love’s Labour’s Lost, 4.3.243, 250; RAVEN = “Legend has it that should the ravens ever leave the Tower of London the White Tower will crumble and a great disaster shall befall England. For many centuries ravens have been known to be residents of the Tower of London” – http://www.tower-of-london.com; (Southampton is in the White Tower); “For he’s disposed as the hateful raven … For he’s inclined as is the ravenous wolf” – 2 Henry VI, 3.1.76-78; “Come, the croaking raven doth bellow for revenge” – Hamlet, 3.2.255-256; MISTRESS: “To be her mistress’ mistress? The queen’s queen?” – Henry VIII, 3.2.95; same as the sovereign mistress, Elizabeth, of “my mistress’ eye” in Sonnet 153, line 14, and “my mistress’ thrall” of Sonnet 154, line 12; “I cannot but find a great grief in myself to remember the Mistress we have lost” – Oxford to Robert Cecil, April 25/27, 1603, referring to the Queen on the eve of her funeral

10 – HER EYES SO SUITED, AND THEY MOURNERS SEEM
MOURNERS = at a funeral, as in The Phoenix and the Turtle (published this year, 1601); the funeral of their son, Southampton, if he is executed; and the funeral of Oxford’s and Elizabeth’s royal hopes for him to succeed to the throne: “Thy end is Truth’s (Oxford’s) and Beauty’s (Elizabeth’s) doom and date” – Sonnet 14, line 14; dovetailing with Sonnet 31, line 5: “How many a holy and obsequious tear/ Hath religious love stolen from mine eye.”

11 – AT SUCH WHO, NOT BORN FAIR, NO BEAUTY LACK
AT SUCH = at her royal son; NOT BORN FAIR = not born with acknowledged royal blood; NO BEAUTY LACK = but still lacks none of his royal blood from “beauty” or Elizabeth

12 – SLAND’RING CREATION WITH A FALSE ESTEEM
SLAND’RING = Disgracing your own child and accusing him of treason; echoing “beauty slandered with a bastard shame” of line 4; (“For slander’s mark was ever yet the fair” – Sonnet 70, line 2; CREATION = created being, child; “From fairest creatures we desire increase” – Sonnet 1, line 1; “But heaven in thy creation did decree” – Sonnet 93, line 9, Oxford to Southampton about Elizabeth (heaven), who gave birth to him; FALSE ESTEEM = false view or estimation of him; (“false women’s fashion” – Sonnet 20, line 4, about Elizabeth); esteeming her son as a “false traitor” as in “To warn false traitors from the like attempts” – Richard III, 3.5.48

13 – YET SO THEY MOURN BECOMING OF THEIR WOE
So Elizabeth’s eyes mourn for her son and for the fate of her royal blood that he possesses; and therefore they are “black” in these verses of the Sonnets; WOE = (“O that our night of woe might have rememb’red/ My deepest sense, how hard true sorrow hits” – Sonnet 120, lines 9-10)

14 – THAT EVERY TONGUE SAYS BEAUTY SHOULD LOOK SO
EVERY = Edward de Vere, E. Ver, Ever or Never; EVERY TONGUE = the voices of others, alluding to “my tongue” or “my voice”; “And art made tongue-tied by authority” – Sonnet 66, line 9; SAYS BEAUTY SHOULD LOOK SO = says that Elizabeth (or more specifically, her blood within Southampton) appears to be in such disgrace

The Three “Monument” Sonnets — 55 and 81 and 107 — In Which the Poet Declares His Purpose

The Shakespearean sonnets printed in 1609 comprise a “monument” of verse for “eyes not yet created” in future generations. The 154 consecutively numbered sonnets represent a single, carefully designed masterwork of literary art. The individual verses are not compiled randomly; they are deliberately arranged into an overall structure, within which all parts operate together in service of the whole. Just as the author’s plays or narrative poems are unified works, so the string of numbered sonnets is a unified creation.

MONUMENT cover

The poet shaped and numbered his sonnets into a complete structure only after the real-life story had run its course. He built his monument for much the same reason the Egyptians built the Pyramids, that is, as tombs to preserve the pharaohs or kings until they attained eternal life.

The overall design of the monument includes 152 sonnets plus a pair of sonnets as an epilogue; the basic structure is a central sequence of 100 sonnets or a “century” of verse, flanked by two sequences of twenty-six sonnets each:

1 to 26 = 26 sonnets
27 to 126 = the century = 100 sonnets
127 to 152 = 26 sonnets

Within the century are three individual sonnets – 55, 81 and 107 – that use the word “monument”; these also provide the foundational descriptions of the monument.

They are arranged so that Sonnet 55 + twenty-six = Sonnet 81 + twenty-six = Sonnet 107.

Sonnet 55 uses “monument” in the first line, although “monuments” fits the context – “Not marble, nor the gilded monuments of Princes…”

The poet testifies that he intends the monument to contain “the living record” of the younger man’s “memory” for readers to come:

Sonnet 55

Not marble nor the gilded monument[s]
Of Princes shall outlive this powerful rhyme,
But you shall shine more bright in these contents
Than unswept stone, besmeared with sluttish time.
When wasteful war shall Statues over-turn,
And broils root out the work of masonry,
Nor Mars his sword nor war’s quick fire shall burn
The living record of your memory.
‘Gainst death and all oblivious enmity
Shall you pace forth; your praise shall still find room
Even in the eyes of all posterity
That wear this world out to the ending doom.
So till the judgment that yourself arise,
You live in this, and dwell in lovers’ eyes.

The poet likely adapted Ovid and Horace in this sonnet, but that does not explain its intensity. Exactly why must he immortalize this younger man? What qualities, or achievements, entitle the younger man to “pace forth” against “death and all oblivious enmity”?

And while promising that “your praise shall still [always] find room even in the eyes of all posterity,” why does he never write the younger man’s name?

From the start, however, the poet is fully aware that “this powerful rhyme” will remain standing long after “the gilded monuments” erected for princes or kings have crumbled. How do we explain such statements if, in fact, the younger man himself is not a prince or king?

Sonnet 81 contains a direct promise to him that “my gentle verse” will become “your monument” for “eyes not yet created” and that “tongues to be” will therefore sing his praises over and over.

Sonnet 81

Or I shall live your Epitaph to make,
Or you survive when I in earth am rotten,
From hence your memory death cannot take,
Although in me each part will be forgotten.
Your name from hence immortal life shall have
Though I (once gone) to all the world must die.
The earth can yield me but a common grave,
When you entombed in men’s eyes shall lie.
Your monument shall be my gentle verse,
Which eyes not yet created shall o’er-read,
And tongues to be your being shall rehearse,
When all the breathers of this world are dead.
You still shall live (such vertue hath my Pen)
Where breath most breathes, even in the mouths of men.

The poet injects himself into the equation, asserting that “each part” of him will be “forgotten” once he departs from this world; but how, given his prediction of Sonnet 55 that “this powerful rhyme” will outlive all statues made of stone, can he also believe that he himself will not be remembered? On the surface, of course, given what we have come to believe, the man known as Shakespeare is certainly one of the most renowned figures in world history!

If his verse will outlive the work of masonry while his name or identity is forgotten, the only possible explanation is that “Shakespeare” is not his real name. It must be a pseudonym or pen name. In the above lines he predicts that “I, once gone, to all the world must die” – in other words, his authorship of these sonnets and all the other Shakespeare works will be unknown to the world.

Clearly a sacrifice is being made, as indicated by the full statement in two lines: “Your name from hence immortal life shall have, though I (once gone) to all the world must die.” The younger man’s name will be known throughout the future of recorded history, while the author’s identity disappears from that same record.

Southampton spent two years and two months in the Tower

Southampton spent two years and two months in the Tower

The only individual with whom “Shakespeare” publicly connected to himself was Henry Wriothesley, third Earl of Southampton (1573-1624), to whom he dedicated his first two published works, the narrative poems Venus and Adonis of 1593 and Lucrece of 1594. The author need not name Southampton in the Sonnets, because Southampton is the one person with whom “Shakespeare” chose to link himself.

But why then does he refrain from identifying Southampton by name? The explanation must be that it would be too dangerous to do so. It would be too dangerous for the author and presumably also for Southampton himself. The earl is special; he is addressed the way one would address a prince or king; but this cannot be written publicly without serious repercussions.

Southampton’s identity is revealed in Sonnet 107, which has been identified by many scholars as referring to events in the spring of 1603 – the death of Queen Elizabeth and the accession of King James on 24 March 1603 and the new monarch’s release of Southampton from the Tower of London on 10 April 1603.

In fact the earl’s liberation from prison after being “supposed as forfeit to a confined doom” [thought to be serving a sentence of lifelong confinement] is the very first statement of this sonnet, indicating it’s the main topic. In the poet’s view, Elizabeth’s death and the transfer of rule from the Tudor dynasty to the Stuart line were not the most important events; rather, the succession of James paved the way for Southampton to gain his freedom.

The earl had been confined in the Tower for twenty-six months, ever since the night of the failed Essex Rebellion on 8 February 1601. Southampton and Essex had gone on trial together on 19 February 1601; both had been found guilty of high treason and sentenced to die; Essex was beheaded six days later, but Southampton was spared execution. He remained in prison until after the succession and King James, before leaving Scotland, sent ahead orders for his immediate release.

Edward de Vere  17th Earl of Oxford The Poet

Edward de Vere
17th Earl of Oxford
The Poet

Sonnet 107 is about Southampton leaving the Tower and looking “fresh” as he had been when, for example, the author in Sonnet 1 in the early 1590s had called him “the world’s fresh ornament and only herald to the gaudy spring.” In the second quatrain the poet refers to the Queen as “the mortal Moon” whose body has come to its natural end although she has “endured” her “eclipse” as a divinely ordained monarch who is immortal.

Those who predicted civil war around the throne were wrong. The transfer of the crown to James, once an uncertainty, is now assured; and England now faces a time of prolonged peace. Now Southampton looks “fresh” again, while the poet claims that he himself will defeat death by living within these eternal lines of the sonnets. But then comes the real point, which is that “in this” verse Southampton will have his “monument,” which will outlive all earthly crests and tombs for monarchs.

Sonnet 107

Not mine own fears, nor the prophetic soul
Of the wide world dreaming on things to come
Can yet the lease of my true love control,
Supposed as forfeit to a confined doom.
The mortal Moone hath her eclipse endured,
And the sad Augurs mock their own presage,
Incertainties now crown themselves assured,
And peace proclaims Olives of endless age.
Now with the drops of this most balmy time
My love looks fresh, and death to me subscribes,
Since spite of him I’ll live in this poor rhyme,
While he insults o’er dull and speechless tribes.
And thou in this shalt find thy monument,
When tyrants’ crests and tombs of brass are spent.

Once again the poet is calling Southampton a prince or king – one who, like Queen Elizabeth herself, deserves immortality. Given that Southampton will never be acknowledged as such during his lifetime or in the record of England’s history, the poet means to create it for him – concealing this dangerous truth within the monument, while also revealing it within the monument to those of us in posterity. After more than four centuries, isn’t it about time for us to comprehend him?

%d bloggers like this: