[15] Thy glorious sweetness shower;

And first let Myrtles Crown his Head;
Then Palms and Lawrels wreath'd between,
But let the Cypress late be seen.

And so succeeding Men,

[20] When they the fulness see

Of this our Joy, shall then
In consort joyn, as well as we,

To celebrate his Praise above,

That spreads our Land with Fruits of Love.

H. WOTTON.

[THIS piece occurs in Ben Jonson's Underwoods, cvii. (Gifford's Jonson, ix. 52); where Gifford has the following note: "This is probably Ben's last tribute of duty to his royal master: it is not his worst; it was perhaps better as it came from the poet, for a stanza has apparently been lost, or confounded with the opening one." I should be sorry to find that Jonson wrote it, and that the poor author must resign his claim to the rich; for what to Jonson is only "not his worst," is to Sir Henry one of his best. But the authority of the second folio of Jonson's Works is constantly disputed by Gifford. All the papers found in Jonson's study seem to have been hastily published, whether they were originals or mere copies. Gifford tells us more than once, that "there was undoubtedly an intercommunity of verse between" Jonson and Donne (viii. 378, 406); and there are grounds for supposing that a similar "intercommunity" existed between Jonson and Wotton. (See Introd.

to No. viii.) It is quite possible, therefore, that Jonson had merely transcribed the poem.-Mr. Dyce says nothing of this double claim upon the piece, either in his edit. of Wotton's Poems, or in his Remarks on Gifford's Jonson.

Archbishop Sancroft has transcribed it on the same page with two others of Sir Henry's, (Nos. vii. and ix.) and assigns all three to him. (MS. Tann. 465, fol. 61, vo.) Another copy in MS. Rawl. Poet. 147, p. 96, also bears the signature of "Sr Henry Wotton." Both these MSS. were written in 1647 or 1648,—that is, after it was published as Jonson's, and before it was printed as Wotton's in Rel. Wotton.

Sir Henry Wotton wrote a Latin tract upon the same occasion, with the title, "Ad Regem è Scotiâ reducem Henrici Wottonii plausus et vota. MDCXXXIII.” An English translation of it, by "a Friend of the Authours," was inserted in the two earlier edits. of Rel. Wotton. and the original tract was added in ed. 1672. The motives which he assigned for this composition may be gathered from some of the letters in Rel. Wotton. (pp. 358, 569, 570, ed. 1672.) Garrard speaks of its first publication in a letter to Wentworth, dated Dec. 6: 1633: and says that it had come forth that week. The Parallel between Essex and Buckingham, which he mentions in the same sentence, continued in MS. some time longer. (Straff. Letters, i. 167, 265.)

Some of the phrases in this Poem are characteristic of Wotton's style; for example, the second line may be compared with the following passage in one of his letters to the Queen of Bohemia's Secretary, John Dinely, under the date of Aug. 12: 1628: "I have gotten, with much adoe, some of the Psalms translated by my late most blessed Master, for

*The Psalter of James I. was not published till 1631. In fact, it was not finished when its reputed Author died. The Commission which was given to Sir W. Alexander (Lord Stirling) to "consider and revew the meeter and poesie thairof," was doubtless meant to have a much wider

the young Prince of Bohemia, (which is one of your Memorials that have slept too long by me,) and I have ransacked mine own poor Papers for some entertainment for the Queen, which shall be sent together;-Though it be now a Misery to re-visit the Fancies of my Youth, which my judgement tells me, are all too green, and my Glass tells me, that my self am gray." (Rel. Wotton. p. 558.) Compare also the following expressions with lines 9, 10:-" methinks not unlike that which Astrologers call a Conjunction of Planets, of no very benign Aspect the one to the other;" (ib. p. 217.) "I am come hither in a very benign Constellation, and silent conspiracy of my chiefest Friends," &c. (ib. p. 575.) Also compare line 19 with the following:-" who, taking him into his regard, taught him more and more to please himself, and moulded him (as it were) Platonically, to his own Idea;" (ib. p. 163, repeated on p. 210. Cf. p. 333.) Taken separately, these coincidences would be scarcely worth remarking; but they serve to shew that Wotton was familiar with the phraseology employed in this Poem.

The Variations are not sufficiently important to quote, except in one instance, viz. in line 17, where both the MSS. read blowne' for bloom'-which is the reading of Rel. Wotton. It is also 'blown' in the first edit. of Jonson; and Gifford has ridiculed Whalley for first vaunting it as a conjectural emendation, to correct the rhyme, and then supporting his conjecture by the early copy. (Life of Jonson, p. ccxxxv.)—The misprint in Rel. Wotton. probably arose, partly from the more familiar idiom, partly from an unseasonable recollection of a line (12) in the last poem. In Jonson, the two concluding lines are inserted after each stanza; and though only given once in the MSS. they are marked as "Chorus."]

application than the terms imply. See Mr. Laing's Notices of Scotch Metr. Versions, in Appendix to Baillie's Letters. (They have been also printed as a separate tract.)

R

OUSE up thy self, my gentle Muse,
Though now our green Conceits be

gray,

And yet once more do not refuse

To take thy Phrygian Harp, and Play [5] In Honor of this chearful Day.

[10]

Make first a Song of Joy and Love,
Which chastely flame in Royal Eyes;
Then tune it to the Spheres above,
When the benignest Stars do rise,

And sweet Conjunctions grace the Skies.

To this let all good Hearts resound,
While Diadems invest his Head;

Long may he live, whose Life doth bound
More than his Laws, and better Lead
[15] By high Example than by Dread!

[20]

Long may He round about Him see
His Roses and His Lilies [blowne];
Long may His only Dear and He
Joy in Ideas of their own,

And Kingdoms Hopes so timely sown;

Long may they both contend to prove,
That best of Crowns is such a Love!
[H. W.]*

*This signature is given, as usual, in ed. 1651. Its omission in ed. 1654 and 1672 cannot be regarded as an argument against Wotton's right to the piece, for it seems to have arisen merely from the fulness of the page.