[Ir is said that the initials W. R. were at first appended to the earliest complete copy of these verses (in England's Helicon, 1600); and that the word Ignoto was afterwards pasted over the letters.* The same alteration appears to have been made in two other cases in that volume. This may have

* Ellis, Specimens, ii. 215, ed. 1811 (from Steevens's copy of E. H.), and Brydges, reprint of E. H. Pref. p. xiii. Ritson, however, speaks of only two cases altogether in which the substitution had been made. Bibl. Poet. pp. 254, 308. If the statement is incorrect with regard to the Reply to Marlow, Raleigh's claim becomes really stronger; for we must then concede that Walton had other reasons for assigning it to him.

+ Namely, "The Shepheard's Description of Loue," and "The Shepheard's Praise of his Sacred Diana," Repr. of E. H. pp. 90, 111. See the Pref. p. xxvii. Both are in the Lee Priory ed. of Raleigh's Poems, pp. 21, 40, and in the Oxford ed. viii. 706, 716. Nothing, however, is said there of the change of signature; and in Brydges' Notes to Raleigh's Poems, p. 69, he speaks as if it had taken place in only one instance. So in the list of the contents of E. H. in Cens. Lit. (i. 148-164, second ed.) where the two pieces just mentioned are numbered 54 and 71, and the Reply to Marlow, 138, the original initials "S. W. R." are only mentioned in the case of No. 71. (p. 161.) "The Shepheard's Description of Loue" (No. 54) is assigned to Raleigh by Ellis, ii. 221. Cayley, i. 14. Campbell, p. 77, second ed.

been done, as Ritson observes, either because Raleigh was not the author, or because he wished to be concealed. The first would be the more natural explanation; but the second has been more generally adopted, because Izaak Walton, who has inserted in his Complete Angler both Marlow's Poem and this Reply, speaks of the latter as "an answer to it which was made by Sir Walter Raleigh in his younger daies." The former he describes as "that smooth song which was made by Kit. Marlow now at least fifty yeers ago.” It may be remarked, in passing, that this second hypothesis is scarcely consistent with the notion that Ignoto was Raleigh's peculiar signature; though some persons have gladly embraced both, for the sake of widening the range of poems ascribed to him. If ever that word ceased to mean simply Anonymous, of course it ceased to be indefinite enough for the purpose of concealment,

"

As so much reliance is placed in Walton's casual assertion, it should be observed, that the passage is scarcely ac curate enough in other respects to warrant such implicit confidence. When the first edition of the Angler was published (1653), Marlow had been dead sixty years; and at the time of his death, Raleigh, whose younger daies" are so expressly mentioned, was forty-one years old. This leads us to suspect, that Walton took his date from the title-page of England's Helicon; and there is at least one other in

* Compl. Angl. p. 105, ed. 1655. There are five poems altogether which were framed on this model. 1. The original song, ascribed to Marlow. 2. The answer printed above. 3. An imitation, also in Engl. Helicon, signed Ignoto, and for that reason given by some to Raleigh (as by Warton, iii. 354, ed. 1840, and Brydges). 4. Another by Donne, Poems, p. 190, ed. 1633 (also in the C. A.). 5. Another by Herrick, Hesperides, p. 223, 1648.-On the general question, enough may be found in Malone's Shakesp. by Boswell, viii. 101-4. Nicolas's ed, of C. A. 116-8. Chappell's Nat. Engl. Airs, ii. 138-40. As to Raleigh, see further, Oldys, p. 132. Tytler, pp. 22, 108. Mr. Collier also admits his claim (Shakesp. viii. 561, 576); and indeed it is strange that any one could ever think Jaggard's evidence of the smallest moment.

stance, in which he seems to have contented himself, in like manner, with the date of a publication.* If this was the case, we should see good reason for assenting to the opinion of Sir H. Nicolas, that Walton gave the present piece to Raleigh, merely because he " used a copy in which the alteration [of the signature,-from W. R. to Ignoto] had not been made." Had he stated that Raleigh wrote the Poem, as the result of his own enquiries on a point of some uncertainty, his authority would have been most weighty; but it is doubtful whether we can build so much upon it, in a case where he seems to have merely acquiesced in the statement which he found before him.

For these reasons, it seems that Raleigh's claim to the Poem is not so certain as some have thought; but after all, I should be sorry to believe that Walton was mistaken. In a case of this kind, the general consent in Raleigh's favour must be allowed due weight. There is a great difference, too, between the mere absence of positive evidence, as in this case, and the existence of contradictory evidence, as in some others.

The Poem is now reprinted from the second edit. of Walton's Angler (p. 110), except that one stanza, which is probably Walton's own, is thrown into a note. The third edit.

* Namely, the case of "Frank Davisons Song, which he made forty years ago." (C. A. p. 165, ed. 1655. It was not so in the first ed.) Sir H. Nicolas supposes that Walton took the date (in round numbers) from the third ed. of Davison, 1611, overlooking those of 1602 and 1608. As this song was by A. W. Walton's remark is one of the evidences tending to identify A. W. with Davison himself. See Nicolas's ed. of C. A. p. 164, and of Davison, pp. cxxvii. 250. The supposition that Walton calculated from the title-pages seems more probable in both cases than that the passages were written some years before the Angler was published. With respect to remarks introduced so incidentally, we should recollect, as a foreign critic judiciously tells us to do in the case of historical narrations, " Quam sæpe in exponendis, approbandis, et exornandis narrationibus, in figmenta delabi soleant homines, quvad nuda facta fide dignissimi.” (Welcker in Hippon. et Anan. Fragm. p. 16.) All that Walton cared for was the Poem. The date and author's name were matters of comparative indifference.

of the Angler agrees with the second; but one or two slight variations (A) were afterwards introduced. The copy in England's Helicon (B) is nearly the same, except in regard to the interpolated stanza. It is printed in the notes to the Lee Priory and Oxford editions, where the text (C), which is very different, is taken from Dr. Birch (ii. 394). A copy printed in the Muse's Library (D) in 1741, is a little different from any of these. I have also marked the few variations (E) in the copy printed by Percy (i. 219, ed. 1767).]

F all the world and Love were young,
And truth in every shepherds tongue,
These pretty pleasures might me move
To live with thee and be thy love.

[5] But time drives flocks from field to fold, When rivers rage and rocks grow cold; And Philomel becometh dumb;

The Rest complains of cares to come.

The flowers do fade, and wanton fields [10] To wayward Winter reckoning yeilds: A honey tongue, a heart of gall,

Is fancies spring, but sorrows fall.

Thy gowns, thy shooes, thy beds of roses,
Thy cap, thy kirtle, and thy posies,

[15] Soon break, soon wither, soon forgotten,-
In folly ripe, in reason rotten.

Thy belt of straw and ivie buds,
Thy coral clasps and amber studs,-

All these in me no means can move [20] To come to thee and be thy Love.*

But could youth last, and love stil breed,—
Had joyes no date, nor age no need;
Then those delights my mind might move
To live with thee and be thy love.

[VARIATIONS. 1. If that the World'-E (and so in the Passionate Pilgrim, 1599, where the first stanza only is printed, as if it were Shakespeare's.)-2. 'on every'-C.-3. 'These pleasures might my passion move'--C.-The second stanza is altogether omitted in C.-5. 'Time driues the flocks'-B D.-7. 'Then Philomel'-A.-8. The Rest complain'-D (so also Ellis; and of course more correctly. But see below, p. 132, note.) And age complains'-A. 'And all complain'-E.-9, 10. So A B, and also E, except ' yield'—In C they stand thus ;— 'But fading flowers in every field

To winter floods their treasures yield;'

The alteration in D keeps nearer to the text, and saves the grammar at the cost of the sense ;;

'The Flowers do fade in wanton Fields;

The wayward Winter Reckoning yields;'

11. 'A honey'd tongue'-C.-13. 'Thy gown'-C.-15. 'Are all soon wither'd, broke, forgotten'-C.-19. 'no Mind can move' -D. 'Can me with no enticements move'-C.-20. 'To live with thee'-C.-21. 'could Love'-C.-22. 'Joy'-D. 'had Age'C.-23. 'these'-B D.]

The following stanza is here inserted in the second edit. of the C. A. It is said to be wanting in the first. Walton has added a similar stanza to Marlow's Poem.

"What should we talk of dainties then,

Of better meat then's fit for men?

These are but vain: that's only good,

Which God hath blest, and sent for food."

K