A	»	B	»	C	»	D	»	E
F	»	G	»	H	»	I	»	J
K	»	L	»	M	»	N	»	O
P	»		R	»	S	»		T
U	»		V	»	W	»		Z

J. B. Henry Savigny and Alexander Correard - "Narrative of a Voyage to Senegal in 1816"

George Sand - "Contes d'une grand mere"

W. Stewart Wallace - "The United Empire Loyalists"

Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher - "The Faithful Shepherdess"

Barnes & Noble swings to loss
Moreover Technologies - Premier purveyor of real-time news and RSS feeds from across the Web

Schuster Not Madrid's Problem - Getafe Boss
Ad -

Marketsquare International offers bookseller training
Barnes & Noble Inc. reported a larger-than-expected loss for the third quarter yesterday and gave little indication that the holidays would be much brighter. The book seller said significantly lower customer traffic and spending at its stores drove

Poetical Works of Edmund Waller and Sir John Denham by Edmund Waller; John Denham

E >> Edmund Waller; John Denham >> Poetical Works of Edmund Waller and Sir John Denham



POETICAL WORKS

OF

EDMUND WALLER

AND

SIR JOHN DENHAM.

WITH MEMOIR AND DISSERTATION,

BY THE

REV. GEORGE GILFILLAN.


M.DCCC.LVII.




THE

LIFE OF EDMUND WALLER.

It is too true, after all, that the lives of poets are not, in general,
very interesting. Could we, indeed, trace the private workings of their
souls, and read the pages of their mental and moral development, no
biographies could be richer in instruction, and even entertainment, than
those of our greater bards. The inner life of every true poet must be
poetical. But in proportion to the romance of their souls' story, is
often the commonplace of their outward career. There have been poets,
however, whose lives are quite as readable and as instructive as their
poetry, and have even shed a reflex and powerful interest on their
writings. The interest of such lives has, in general, proceeded either
from the extraordinary misfortunes of the bard, or from his extremely
bad morals, or from his strange personal idiosyncrasy, or from his being
involved in the political or religious conflicts of his age. The life of
Milton, for instance, is rendered intensely interesting from his
connexion with the public affairs of his critical and solemn era. The
life of Johnson is made readable from his peculiar conformation of body,
his bear-like manners, his oddities, and his early struggles. You devour
the life of Gifford, not because he was a poet, but because he was a
shoemaker; and that of Byron, more on account of his vices, his peerage,
and his domestic unhappiness, than for the sake of his poetry. And in
Waller, too, you feel some supplemental interest, because he united what
are usually thought the incompatible characters of a poet and a
political plotter, and very nearly reached the altitudes of the gallows
as well as those of Parnassus.

March 1605 was the date, and Coleshill, in Hertfordshire, the place, of
the birth of our poet. He was of an ancient and honourable family
originally from Kent, some members of which were distinguished for their
wealth and others for the valour with which, at Agincourt and elsewhere,
they fought the battles of their country. Robert Waller, the poet's
father, inherited from Edmund, _his_ father, the lands of Beaconsfield,
in Bucks, and other territory in Hertfordshire. These had been in 1548-9
left by Francis Waller, in default of issue by his own wife, to his
brothers Thomas and Edmund, but Thomas dying, Edmund inherited the
whole. Robert, on receiving his estates, quitted the profession of the
law, to which he had attached himself, and spent the rest of his life
chiefly at Beaconsfield, employed in the manly business and healthy
amusements of a country gentleman. He died in August 1616, and left a
widow and a son--the son, Edmund, being eleven years of age. It was at
Beaconsfield. We need hardly remind our readers, that a far greater
Edmund--Edmund Burke--spent many of his days. It was there that he
composed his latest and noblest works, the "Reflections on the French
Revolution," and the "Letters on a Regicide Peace;" and there he
surrendered to the Creator one of the subtlest, strongest, brightest,
and best of human souls. Shortly after Burke's death, the house of
Beaconsfield was burnt down, and no trace of it is now, we believe,
extant.

Mrs. Waller's brother, William, was the father of John Hampden. His
wife, Elizabeth Cromwell, the aunt of the great Oliver, was, however,
and continued to the end, a violent Royalist; and Cromwell, although he
treated both her and her son with kindness, and on the terms of their
relationship, was so provoked at hearing that she carried on a secret
correspondence with the Stewart party, that he confined her under a very
strict watch in the house of her daughter, Mrs. Price, whose husband was
on the side of the Parliament. It is exceedingly probable that from the
"mother's milk" of early prejudice was derived that spirit of
partisanship which distinguished alike the writings and the life of the
poet. It is possible, too, that contact with men so far above moral
heroism and rugged mental force as Cromwell and Hampden, instead of
exciting emulation, led to envy, and that his divergence from their
political path sprung more from personal feeling than from principle.

He was educated, first, at the grammar school of Market, Wickham; then
at Eton; and, in fine, at King's College, Cambridge. Accounts vary as to
his proficiency--one Bigge, who had been his school-fellow at Wickham,
told Aubrey that he never expected Waller to have become such an eminent
poet, and that he used to write his exercises for him. Others, on the
contrary, have alleged that it was the fame of his scholarship which led
to his election for Agmondesham, a borough in Bucks, when he was only
sixteen years of age. This story, so far as his premature learning goes,
seems rather apocryphal; but certain it is, that when scarcely eighteen,
he had become M.P. for the above-mentioned borough. The parliament in
which he found himself, was one of those subservient and cringing
assemblies which James I. was wont to summon to sit till they had voted
the supplies, and then contemptuously to dismiss. It met in November
1621, and after passing a resolution in support of their privileges,
which James tore out of the Journals with his own hand, and granting the
usual supplies, was dissolved on the 6th of January 1622. Waller was
probably as silent and servile as any of his neighbours. He began,
however, to feel his way as a courtier, and overheard some curious and
not very canonical talk of James with his lords and bishops, the record
of which reminds you of some of the richer scenes of the "Fortunes of
Nigel." The next parliament was not called till 1624, when Waller was
not elected. The electors of Agmondesham, who had, meantime, obtained
fuller privileges, chose two matured members to represent them, and the
precocious boy lost his seat.

Waller's "political and poetical life began nearly together." It was in
his eighteenth year that he wrote his first poetical piece--that on the
escape of Prince Charles from a tempest on his return from Spain. It is
a tissue of smooth and musical mediocrity. It shews a kind of stunted
prematurity. The perfection which is attained by a single effort is
generally a poor and tame one. This poem of Waller's, like several of
his others, has all that merit which arises from the absence of fault,
and all that fault which arises from the absence of merit--of high
poetic merit, we mean, for in music it is equal to any of his poems.
Much has been said about the model which he followed in his
versification, the majority of critics tracing in it an imitation of
Fairfax's Tasso. The fact seems to be that Waller, with a good ear, had
a very limited theory of verse. He worshipped smoothness, and sought it
at every hazard. He preferred the Jacob of a soft flowing commonplace to
the rough hairy Esau of a strong originality, cumbered with its own
weight and richness. We think that this excessive love of the soft, and
horror at the rude, materially weakened his genius. The true theory of
versification lies in variety, and in accommodation to the necessities
and fluctuations of the thought. The "Paradise Lost," written in
Waller's rhyme, would have been as ridiculous as Waller's love to
Saccharissa expressed in Milton's blank verse. The school before Waller
were too rugged, but surely there is a medium between the roughness of
Donne, and the honied monotony of the author of the "Summer Islands."
The practice of running the lines into one another, severely condemned
by Johnson, and systematically shunned by Waller, has often been
practised with success by poets far greater than either--such as Shelley
and Coleridge. It is remarkable that Dryden, while he praised, did not
copy our poet's manner, but gave himself freer scope. Pope, on the other
hand, pushed his love of uniform tinkle and unmitigated softness to
excess, and transferred this kind of luscious verse from small poems,
where it is often a merit, to large ones, where it is a mistake. In his
"Iliad," for instance, the fierce ire of Achilles, the dignified
resentment of Agamemnon, the dull courage of Ajax, the chivalrous
sentiment of Hector, the glowing energy of Diomede, the veteran wisdom
of Nestor, the grief of Andromache, the love of Helen, the jealousy of
Juno, and the godlike majesty of Jupiter, are all expressed in the same
sweet and monotonous melody--a verse called "heroic," by courtesy, or on
the principle of contradiction, like _lucus a non lucendo_. In Waller,
however, his poems being all, without exception, rather short, you never
think of quarrelling with his uniformity of manner; and rise from his
lines as from a liberal feast of hot-house grapes, thankful, but feeling
that a _few more_ would have turned satisfaction into nausea. Yet you
feel, too, that perhaps his selection of small themes, and the
consequent curbing of his powers, have sprung from his fastidiousness in
the matter of versification. The sermons, the satires, the speeches, the
odes, and the didactic poems of the fastidious are generally _short_,
and do not, therefore, fully mirror the amplitude, or express the energy
of their genius. To his poem on the escape of Prince Charles, succeeded
that on the Prince, and two or three others of a similar kind; all
finding their inspiration, not as yet in that love of others which
animated his amatory effusions, but in that love to himself and his own
interest which marks the incipient courtier, who is beginning, in
Shakspeare's thought, to hang his knee upon "hinges," that it may bend
more readily to power. Yet his case shews that there is a certain
incompatibility between the profession of a courtier and that of a poet.
He often began his panegyrics with much fervour, but the fit passed, or
his fastidious taste produced disgust at what he had written, and it was
either not finished, or was delayed till the interest of the occasion
had passed away.

After the death of James I., Charles called a new parliament in 1625,
and in it Waller took his place for Chipping-Wycombe, a borough in
Buckinghamshire. This parliament met in London, but was adjourned to
Oxford on account of the Plague. In Oxford, it proved refractory to the
king's wishes, and refusing to grant him a tithe of the supplies which
he demanded, was summarily dismissed. Waller was not re-elected in 1626,
when the next parliament was summoned, but secured his return for
Agmondesham in March 1627. He appears to have been in these years a
silent senator, taking little interest or share in the debates, but
retiring from them to offer the quit-rent of his versicles--a laureate
without salary, and yet not probably much more sincere than laureates
generally are; for although his loyalty was undoubted, his expressions
of it in rhyme are often hyperbolical to a degree.

In his twenty-sixth year, he married an heiress, the daughter of Mr.
Banks, a wealthy London citizen. In this there was nothing singular but
the fact, that he, as yet obscure, distanced a rival of great influence,
whose suit was supported by royalty--namely, Mr. Crofts, afterwards
Baron Crofts--gave rather a romantic and adventurous air to the match.
He retired soon after to Beaconsfield, where he spent some happy years
in the enjoyment of domestic society, pursuing, too, his studies under
the direction of Morley, afterwards Bishop of Winchester, a
distinguished scholar of the time, who resided with him. During this
period he is said to have read many poets, but to have written little
poetry. Although the king, jealous of his subjects, had, in 1632, by a
most absurd and arbitrary decree, commanded all the lords and gentry in
the kingdom to reside on their own estates, Waller did not at the time
consider this an exceeding hardship. Indeed, his feelings were on no
subject, and under no pressure of circumstances, either very profound or
very lasting.

His wife died after having borne him a son and a daughter--a son, who
did not long survive his mother; and a daughter, who became afterwards
Mrs. Dormer of Oxfordshire. From under this calamity Waller, yet only
thirty years of age, rebounded with characteristic elasticity. He came
back, nothing both, to the society he had left, and was soon known to be
in quest of a fair lady, whom he has made immortal by the sobriquet of
Saccharissa. She was the eldest daughter of the Earl of Leicester, and
her name was the Lady Dorothy Sidney. This lady was counted beautiful.
Her father was absent in foreign parts. She lived almost alone in
Penshurst. It added to her charms, at least in a poetical eye, that she
was descended from Sir Philip Sidney; a man whose name, as the flower of
chivalry and the soul of honour, is still "like ointment poured forth"
in the estimation of the world--whose death rises almost to the dignity
and grandeur of a martyrdom--and who has left in his "Arcadia" a
quaintly decorated, conceived, and unequally chiselled, but true, rich,
and magnificent monument of his genius. In spite, however, of all
Waller's tender ditties, of the incense he offered up--not only to
Dorothy, but to her sister Lady Lucy, and even to her maid Mrs.
Braughton--his goddess was inexorable, and not only rejected, but
spurned him from her feet. The poet bore this disappointment, as all
poets, Dante hardly excepted, have borne the same: he transferred his
affections to another, who, indeed, ere Saccharissa-like the sun had set
in the west, had risen like the moon in the east of her lover's
admiration, and soon, although only for a short time, possessed the sky
alone. This was his Amoret, who is said to have been Lady Sophia Murray.
The Juliet, however, was not one whit more placable than the Rosalind--
she, too, rejected his suit; and this rejection threw Waller, not into
despair or melancholy, but into a wide sea of miscellaneous flirtations,
with we know not how many Chlorises, Sylvias, Phyllises, and Flavias,
all which names stood, it seems, for real persons, and testified to a
universality in the poet's affections which is rather ludicrous than
edifying. His heart was as soft, and shallower than his verse.

Saccharissa married Lord Spencer, afterwards the Earl of Sunderland, who
was killed at the battle of Newbury. After his death, she was united to
a Mr. Robert Smythe; and she now lies at Brinton, in Northamptonshire,
while her picture continues, from the walls of the gallery at Penshurst,
to shed down the soft, languishing, and voluptuous smile which had
captivated the passions, if it could hardly be said to have really
touched the heart, of her poetical admirer. He not very long after his
twofold rejection, consoled himself by marrying a second wife. Her name
was Breaux or Bresse; and all we know of her is, that she bore and
brought up a great many children.

In 1639, the urgencies of the times compelled Charles to call a new
parliament, and it was decreed that politics instead of love and song
should now for a time engross our poet. And there opened up to him
unquestionably a noble field of patriotic exertion had he been fully
adapted for its cultivation--his firmness been equal to his eloquence,
and his sincerity to his address--had he been more of a Whig in the good
old Hampden sense, and less of a trimmer. As it is, he cuts, on the
whole, a doubtful figure, and is no great favourite with the partisans
of either of the great contending parties. He was again elected member
for Agmondesham, and when the question came before the House, whether
the supplies demanded by Strafford should be granted, or the grievances
complained of by the Commons should be first redressed, he delivered an
oration, trying with considerable dexterity to steer a medium course
between the two sides. In this speech, while contending for the
constitutional principle advocated by the Commons, and expressing great
attachment to his Majesty's person, he maintained that the chief blame
of the king's obnoxious measures lay with his clerical advisers, and
concluded by moving that the House should first consider the grievances,
and then grant the royal demand. Charles, who had personally requested
Waller to second the motion for instantly granting the supplies, was
not, we imagine, particularly pleased with his "volunteer" laureate's
conduct; and his temporary defection did not tend to allay the royal
fury at the parliament, which burst out forthwith in an act of sudden
and wrathful dismissal.

This session, called from its extreme brevity the Short Parliament,
ended in May. In November met that memorable assembly, destined not to
separate till it had outlived a monarchy and a hierarchy, and seen a
brewer's son take the sceptre instead of the descendant of a hundred
kings, the Long Parliament. Waller, again member for Agmondesham, had
made himself popular by his speech in the beginning of the year, and was
chosen by the Commons to manage the prosecution of Judge Crawley for
advising the levy of ship-money. He conducted the case with talent,
acuteness, and moderation. Soon after, however, as the gulph widened
between the king and the parliament, his position became extremely
awkward. His understanding on the whole was with the parliament,
although he did not approve of some of their measures, but his heart was
with the royal cause. He first of all, along with a others (whose
example was imitated by Fox and his party during the French Revolution),
retired from parliament, but in consequence of the permission or request
of the king, he speedily resumed his seat. When Charles put himself in a
warlike attitude in August 1642, Waller sent him a present of a thousand
broad pieces. Still his plausible language, the tone of moderation which
he preserved, and his connexion with Cromwell and Hampden, rendered the
popular party unwilling to believe him a traitor to their cause, and he
was appointed, after the battle at Edgehill, one of the commissioners
who met at Oxford to treat of peace. Here, it is said, that one of those
compliments which cost the subtle Charles so little (Waller was last in
being presented to the king, and his Majesty told him, "Though last, you
are not the lowest nor the least in my favour"), gained over Waller, and
suggested to him the scheme of his famous plot. We do not think so
little of our hero's intellect, or so much of his heart, as to credit
this story. Though not aged, he was by far too old to be caught with
such chaff. He knew, too, before, Charles' private sentiments towards
him, and we incline with some of his biographers to suppose that these
words of royalty were simply the signal to Waller to fire the train
which the king knew right well had already been prepared.

Poets are in general poor politicians and miserable plotters. They
seldom, even in verse or fiction, manage a state plot well. Scott, at
least, has completely failed in his treatment of the Popish plot in
"Peveril," and they always bungle it in reality. They are either too
unsuspicious or too scheming, too shallow or too profound. That mixture
of transparency and craft, of simplicity and subtlety, requisite to all
deep schemes, and which Poe (himself a confused compound of the genius,
the simpleton, and the scoundrel) has so admirably exemplified in the
"Purloined Letter," is not often competent to men of imagination and
impulse. Waller was not a very creative spirit; but here he was true to
his class, and failed like a very poet. He had a brother-in-law named
Tomkins, clerk of the Queen's Council, and possessed of much influence
in the city. Consulting together on national affairs, it struck them
simultaneously that energetic measures might yet save the court. They
saw, or thought they saw, a reaction in favour of the royal cause, and
they determined to try and unite the royalists together in a peaceful
but strong combination against the parliament. They appointed
confidential agents to make out, in the different parishes and wards,
lists of those persons who were or were not friendly to their cause; and
to secure secresy, they prohibited more than three of their party from
meeting in one place, and no individual was to reveal the design to more
than two others. Lord Conway, fresh from Ireland, joined the
confederacy, and probably the counsels of such an ardent soldier served
to modify the original purpose, and to give it a military colour.
Meanwhile, Sir Nicholas Crispe, a bolder spirit than Waller, had
organised a different scheme in favour of Charles. He had, when a
merchant in the city, procured a loan of L100,000 for the king; he had
then raised and taken the command of a regiment; he had obtained from
Charles a commission of array, which Lady Aubigny, ignorant of its
contents, was to deliver to a gentleman in London. Crispe's plan was
bold and comprehensive. He intended to remove the king's children to a
place of safety, to enlist soldiers, collect magazines, and raise monies
by contribution, to release the prisoners committed by the parliament,
to arrest some of the leading members in both Houses, to issue
declarations, and whenever the conspiracy was ripe, to raise flags at
Temple Bar, the Exchange, and other central spots.

It was impossible that two such plots could escape collision with each
other--or that either should be long concealed. On the 31st May 1643, a
fast-day, Pym is seated in St. Margaret's Church, hearing sermon. A
messenger enters and gives him a letter. He reads hastily--communicates
its intelligence in whispers to those beside him, and hurries out. No
time is lost. Pym and his party could not trifle now though they would,
and would not though they could. Waller and Tomkins are seized that
night in their houses, and overwhelmed with fear, confess everything. It
is suspected that Waller was betrayed by his sister, Mrs. Price, who was
married to a zealous parliamentarian. A strange story is told, that one
Goode, her chaplain, had stolen some of his papers, and would have got a
hold of them all, had not Waller, having DREAMED that his sister was
perfidious, risen and secured the rest. Clarendon, on the other hand,
says that the discovery was made by a servant of Tomkins, who acted as a
spy for the parliament. At all events, they were found out, and, in
their terror and pusillanimity, they betrayed their associates. The Duke
of Portland and Lord Conway were instantly arrested. Lady Aubigny, too,
was imprisoned, but contrived to make her escape to the Hague. Even the
Earl of Northumberland was involved in the charges which now issued in a
trembling torrent from the lips of the detected conspirator, who
confessed a great deal that could not have been discovered, and offered
to reveal the private conversations of ladies of rank, and to betray all
and sundry who were in the slightest degree connected with the plot.
Tomkins had somehow got possession of Crispe's commission of array,
which he had buried in the garden, but which was now, on his
information, dug up. Never did a conspiracy fall to pieces more rapidly,
completely, and, for the conspirators, more disgracefully.

This discovery proves a windfall to the parliamentary party. Pym hies to
the citizens and apprises them, in one breath, at once of their danger
and their signal deliverance. The Commons draw up a vow and covenant,
expressing their detestation of all such conspiracies, and appoint a day
of thanksgiving for the escape of the nation. Meanwhile Waller and
Portland are confronted, when the one repeats his charge and Portland
denies it. Conway, too, maintains his innocence, and as Waller is the
only evidence against either him or Portland, both are, after a long
imprisonment, admitted to bail. Tomkins, Chaloner (the agent of Crispe),
Hassel (the king's courier between Oxford and London), Alexander Hampden
(Waller's cousin), and some subordinate conspirators, are arraigned
before a Council of War. Waller feigns himself so ill with remorse of
conscience, that his trial is put off that he "may recover his
understanding." Hassel dies the night before the trial. Tomkins and
Chaloner are hanged before their own doors. Hampden escapes punishment,
but is retained in prison, where he dies; and the subordinates just
referred to (Blinkorne and White) are pardoned. Northumberland, owing to
his rank, is only once examined before the Lords. Those whose names were
inserted in the commission of array are treated as malignants, and their
estates seized.

Waller, having received some respite, employed the time in petitioning,
flattering, bribing, confessing, beseeching, and in the exercise of
every other art by which a mean, cowardly spirit seeks to evade death.
He appealed from the military jurisdiction to the House of Commons, and
was admitted to plead his cause at their bar. His speech was humble,
conciliating, and artful, but failed to gain the object. He was expelled
from the House, and soon after was sisted before the Court of War, and
condemned to die. He was reprieved, however, by Essex, and at the end of
a year's imprisonment, the sentence was commuted into a fine of L10,000,
and banishment for life. He was sent to "recollect himself in another
country." He had previously expended, it is said, L30,000 in bribes.