We have seen the form satirical verse was beginning to exhibit from the time the couplet was adopted, and it is pretty clear that this form continued to develop in satirical poetry down to the time of Dryden, and needed only his genius for its perfection. Jonson's influence was not so prominent in polishing the couplet as in shaping the form of lyric verse and in opposing the school of Donne. As Professor Wendell says in his "Temper of the Seventeenth Century:" "With him classicism meant the expression of sound sense in pure language. One is hardly apt, accordingly, to group him with the deliberate pseudo-classic writers of later times, who imposed on English the bondage of the heroic couplet.

It is on this point that the views of Professor Schelling in his excellent article on "Ben Jonson and the Classical School" seem to need considerable modification, and it is the only point to which we need give attention here. That Jonson drew his theory of poetry from the ancients and based his practice on their sounder precepts; that his classical tastes are manifested in condensation of thought, repression of over-ornateness, form in the whole composition, and purity of diction; that his choice of subjects indicates classical tendency - all this we may grant. But the statement that "the couplet in Jonson's hands exhibits in a lesser degree all those peculiarities which characterize its later use in the hands of Dryden and Pope," is surely open to question.

In supporting this statement Professor Schelling disregards irregularity of metre, in which Jonson is a notable offender, and confines his investigation to the following points: (1) number of run-on lines and couplets; (2) number and position of cæsuras; (3) epigrammatic or antithetical structure. On the first two points he adopts the statistical method, and we shall find it interesting, I think, to compare his figures with those of Professor Alden in his book on "English Verse," with Dr. Wood's on Sandys, and with my own. The comparison will at least reveal the merits and weaknesses of the method employed. In each case the figures are percentages based on from two hundred to six hundred or more lines. Professor Schelling's figures and my

For the passages chosen consult Alden and Schelling.

own are taken from the same passages in Sandys and Spenser; in the case of Jonson I have taken his passages (six hundred lines), and three hundred lines in addition.

Now it can hardly be argued even on Professor Schelling's figures that Jonson resembles the later school in avoiding run-on lines and couplets. And if we accept the higher percentages upon which Professor Alden and myself are practically agreed (twenty-six run-on lines and eight run-on couplets), we must conclude that no writer in this period, with the exception of such eccentrics as Donne and Chapman, and few in any period, use run-on lines with greater freedom and violence. It may be added that his practice in this respect is varied, and that at times he is more careless than at others. Thus in the "Epistle to Selden" we find forty-three per cent run-on lines and nineteen run-on couplets, but in one hunded lines of the "Execration upon Vulcan," only thirteen and two, respectively. In the case of Jonson, therefore, I am inclined to think that to argue from these figures would be to confound classicism with painstaking and romanticism with carelessness.

Professor Schelling next considers the percentage of lines with no cæsura, and the percentage of lines in which the cæsura is medial, i. e., falls after the fourth, fifth, or sixth syllable and thus divided the line into fairly equal parts. Let us again compare the three tables:

Here Professor Schelling reaches novel conclusions, which though in a way justified by his figures, are by no means satisfying. He makes two groups of writers; one consisting of Spenser and his followers and Sandys, whose lines are marked by a loose structure and few cæsural pauses; the other consisting of Jonson, Waller, Dryden, and Pope, whose lines are marked by shorter clauses, interpolation, and insertion, resulting in a larger number of cæsuras. There is a degree of truth in this classification. Such men as Spenser, Drayton, and to some extent Sandys, employ periodic structure and climactic effects far less than do Dryden, Pope, or Jonson. On the other hand, as is pointed out by Professor Saintsbury in his "Life of Dryden," the versification of the classical school is marked by greater swiftness and lightness, due largely to a smaller number of cæsuras. Here our figures, based on honest opinions of the way the lines should be read, show curious disagreement. We all agree in giving Jonson few lines without cæsura. We disagree over Dryden and Pope. Professor Schelling gives Pope twenty-one lines without cæsura, Dryden thirty-six; I find fiftysix and sixty-six, respectively; Professor Alden gives Pope forty-four, and surely errs in giving the more rapid lines of Dryden but forty. The reader may turn to the two poets and decide for himself. It is at least true that if Jonson is akin to the later writers on account of frequency of cæsura, so also is crabbed John Donne, whose use of the cæsura is almost identical with that of Jonson. And if we consider the number of irregular or variant cæsuras, Donne and Jonson use twice as many as any other writer we have studied. On this whole question of form in the couplet, Professor Schelling, when he says that Jonson's

couplet "exemplifies all the characteristics which with greater emphasis came in time to distinguish the manner and versification of Waller and Dryden," is less in the right than Macaulay when he compares them to "blocks rudely hewn out by an unpracticed hand with a blunt hatchet."

It must be remembered that the epigrammatic tendency in Jonson is marked. In this respect, as in many others, he resembles the writers of his period, and particularly the early school of satirists. His affinity with these men deserves emphasis. In his satirical and epistolary writings, which form the bulk of his non-dramatic poetry, he resembles them in vigor, in compactness, and even in roughness. For if Ben would have had Donne hung "for not keeping of accent, "I am not sure that he himself should not have been pilloried for similar offenses. In his more painstaking work, however, he attained considerable fluency and ease; and in his strictly lyrical verse he influenced the form of that type of poetry to an extent that cannot easily be overestimated.

I add a fairly complete collection, taken from the "Discoveries" and the "Conversations With Drummond," of the scraps. of doctrine which Jonson threw out bearing on this subject:

I know nothing can conduce more to letters than to examine the writings of the ancients, and not to rest in their sole authority or take all upon trust from them. It is true they opened the gates and made the way, that went before us; but as guides, not commanders.- Discoveries (XXI).

....

• As we should take care that our style in writing be neither dull nor empty, we should look again it be not winding, or wanton in far-fetched descriptions: either is a vice.-Ibid. (CXVI).

Pure and neat language I love, yet plain and customary. A barbarous phrase hath often made me out of love with good sense, and doubtful writing has wracked me beyond my patience.—Ibid. (CXVIII).

That he had ane intention to perfect ane Epick Poem . . . . it is all in couplets for he detesteth all other rimes. Said he had written a Discouse on Poesie both against Campion and Daniel, especially this last, where he proves couplets to be the bravest sort of verse, especially when they are broken like hexameters; and that crosse rimes and stanzaes (because the purpose would lead him beyond right lines to conclude) were all forced.- Conversations With Drummond (Cunningham ed., III, p. 470).

That Donne, for not keeping of accent, deserved hanging.— Ibid. (p. 471).

That he wrott all his verses first in prose, for so his master Cambden had learned him. That verses stood by sense, without colours or accent. [But this at other times he denied ]—Ibid. (p. 486).

Among Ben Jonson's epigrams occurs the following (No. 4), celebrating King James's glory as prince and poet:

How, best of kings, dost thou a scepter bear?
How, best of poets, dost thou laurel wear?

But two things rare the Fates had in their store,

And gave thee both, to show they could do no more."

For such a poet, while thy days were green,

Thou wert, as chief of them are said t' have been.

And such a prince thou art, we daily see,

As chief of those still promise they will be.
Whom should thy muse then fly to, but the best
Of kings, for grace; of poets, for my test?

These epigrams were first published in 1616, and Bishop Montague's collected edition of the writings of King James also appeared that year. Whether Jonson had an opportunity to see this edition before writing his epigram, or whether, as is likely, he was previously familiar with the King's essays in verse and criticism, does not matter for us here. It seems clear at least that the appearance of the edition was the signal for a more general recognition of the King's claims as a poet.

The most definite and noteworthy instance of this recognition is found in the works of Sir John Beaumont. Among his poems, which Grosart shows were written all through the period from 1602 to his death in 1627, occurs a composition of some seventy carefully polished lines "To his late Majesty, concerning the true form of English Poetry." These lines, which were probably written soon after the appearance of the Montague edition, the "late" being supplied by the first editor, indicate a careful study of the King's "Reules and Cauteles," a treatise on versification which he wrote as a boy of eighteen in Scotland. Since the influence of the King on contemporary poetry has never been

"The conceit and the phrasing of these lines show that they were in Dryden's memory when he wrote his famous motto under Milton's portrait. "Introduction to his edition of Beaumont in the "Fuller Worthies" Series (1869). The edition followed is the first and posthumous edition of 1629. 'For a modern edition see R. S. Raits "A Royal Rhetorician," Westminster (1900).