Peter R. Moore “The Rival Poet of Shake-speare’s Sonnets” lifetime, such as Henslowe, Alleyn, Nashe, The Rival Poet of Spenser, Bacon, Peacham, or Jonson himself! Shakespeare’s Sonnets 7) Shakespeare himself is silent on any “liter- ary activities,” even in his Last Will and Testa- ment; 8) indeed, the only clear-cut identifica- by Peter R. Moore tion of the Stratford man with the authorship is made seven years after his death, in the First HAKE-SPEARES SONNETS appeared in Folio; 9) The First Folio testimony is inconsis- 1609, apparently published without the tent with all the other evidence before us, lead- Sauthor’s consent, and probably quickly ing anti-Stratfordians to suspect that docu- suppressed by the authorities as they were not ment’s trustworthiness; and 10), if a nobleman republished until 1640. There are 154 sonnets; had written these works (a possibility deduced the first 126 address a young aristocrat, com- from the internal evidence of the plays them- monly called the Fair Youth, with whom selves), he would have been unable––owing to Shakespeare was infatuated (though whether the social opprobrium afforded poets and play- the motivation was sexual is quite unclear––I wrights of the nobility––to publish them under join the majority who believe it was not). The his own name, and would have been obliged, next twenty-six describe Shakespeare’s rela- therefore, to either use a nom de plume or to tions with his unfaithful mistress, the Dark work out an agreement with someone to loan Lady. These sonnets were apparently written his name for this purpose. during rather than after the Fair Youth series, With this last hypothesis, all of the items and so Sonnet 126 may be taken as the closing enumerated are consistent, which is not, of poem. Sonnets 78 to 86 concern a Rival Poet course, to argue its certainty, but goes a long who competed with Shakespeare for the affec- way to establishing its probability––at least as tions of the Fair Youth. Sonnets 153 and 154 against the Stratfordian inference that Shak- are an unrelated finial. spere “somehow” overcame these objections, The principal questions about the Sonnets “because he was a genius!” are the identities of the Fair Youth, Dark Lady, and Rival Poet, the dates of their composition, • N • the problem of whether their 1609 order is cor- Works Cited rect, and what, if any, topical allusions are Fischer, David Hackett. Historians’ Fallacies: found in them. This article supports the con- Toward a Logic of Historical Thought. New sensus that the Fair Youth was Henry Wriothe- York: Harper Collins, 1970. sley, thirrd Earl of Southampton, a vain and Giroux, Robert. “Letter.” New York Times Book reckless young man who, following a treason Review. May 19, 1985. conviction and two years of imprisonment, Marder, Louis. Shakespeare Newsletter. Summer matured into a model husband, a courageous (1985): 22. champion of Parliamentary rights, and a hard- Ogburn, Charleton. The Mysterious William Shakespeare. New York: Dodd, Mead, 1984. working patron and director of the Virginia Schoenbaum, Samuel. Shakespeare’s Lives. Oxford: colony. He was born in 1573 and died on cam- Clarendon Press, 1970. paign in the Netherlands in 1624. Shake- Evans, Gwynne and Harry Levin. “Was Shakespeare speare’s only dedications (of Venus and Shakespeare?” Harvard Magazine. Feb (1975): 42. Adonis in 1593 and The Rape of Lucrece in 15 The Shakespeare Oxford Society’s 50th Anniversary Anthology Newsletter Fall 1989 1594) were written to Southampton. No sub- best friend and hero of the youthful 3rd Earl of stantial candidate has emerged for the role of Southampton. He was also a poet whose talent the Dark Lady. The most often proposed Rival was admired by his contemporaries. Poets are George Chapman and Christopher Essex exerted a major gravitational force Marlowe, but the arguments for them are thin; on his age, and he influenced William Shake- even weaker cases have been offered for virtu- speare, who praised Essex in Henry V. Con- ally every other contemporary professional temporaries also saw a resemblance, intended poet. The conventional wisdom is that the or not, between Essex and Bolingbroke in Sonnets were begun in the early of mid 1590s Richard II. It has plausibly been suggested and continue past the death of Queen Elizabeth that Love’s Labour’s Lost had something to do and the advent of King James in 1603 (which with Essex’s circle, that the description of events are referred to in Sonnet 107). This Cawdor’s execution in Macbeth evokes the series of articles will argue that the conven- death of Essex, and that “The Phoenix and the tional wisdom is correct. As has been indicat- Turtle” glorifies Essex’s love for Elizabeth. ed, I also feel that with the two subseries Above all, Essex appears in books about (Sonnets 1 to 126 and 127 to 154) the Sonnets Shakespeare as the hero of Southampton, are in the right order. Shakespeare’s sole dedicatee. There are over And now to the the Rival Poet. ten good reasons for proposing Essex as the Robert Devereux, second Earl of Essex, Rival of the Sonnets, and, in Ben Jonson’s was the brilliant but flawed star of the late words, “I therefore will begin.” Eliza-bethan firmament. He was the Queen’s First, Sonnets 78 to 86 describe a man most illustrious (though not her best) military who was Shakespeare’s rival for the affections and naval commander during the 1590s; he of Southampton during the 1590s. The man was her last great favorite, and he attempted to who is known to have had Southampton’s take over her government from the astute and affection during that period was the heroic and cautious dynasty of Sir William Cecil, Lord charismatic Earl of Essex. Southampton at- Burghley and his son Sir Robert. Desperation tempted to serve under Essex in the Cadiz ex- and mental instability led him into a botched pedition of 1596, but was forbidden by the coup that cost him his head in February 1601. Queen; he did serve under and was knighted by He was intelligent, handsome, athletic, impro- Essex on the Azores expedition of 1597. Sou- vident, charming, a generous patron of writers, thampton sought Essex’s counsel when in a commander of real talent, a confirmed wom- financial difficulties, agreed to marry his pen- anizer, a devout Protestant who leaned toward niless cousin (whom he had gotten with child) Puritanism, a ditherer on several critical occa- in 1598, and named his own daughter after his sions, and a dangerously unstable egotist who hero’s sister. During the failed Irish campaign finally lost touch with reality. He was also the of 1599, Essex made Southampton his General of the Horse and was furious when Queen Reprinted from the 1989 Fall Shakespeare Oxford Elizabeth vetoed his decision. Newsletter, as the first in a series of three articles. In December 1599, Essex was near death The second, “Dating Shakespeare’s Sonnets 78- with fever and wrote Southampton a moving 100,” was published in the Winter 1990 issue. The letter of counsel. This letter, published in third, “Every Word doth almost tell my Name,” was published in the Spring 1990 issue. Thomas Birch’s Memoirs of the Reign of 16 Peter R. Moore “The Rival Poet of Shake-speare’s Sonnets” Queen Elizabeth, holds several points of inter- have regarded him as a rival, but this objection est. Like Shake-speare’s Sonnets 2 and 4, it ignores the fact that the rivalry lay in the eyes addresses Sou-thampton in terms of the of Southampton and not in the views of literary Parable of the Talents. It also contains the fol- critics. Any poetic praise from his hero was lowing passage, which confirms that on some bound to make Southampton ecstatic. This is a previous occasion Essex eulogized sufficient answer to the objection, but two less- Southampton: er points may be added. First, Shake-speare’s What I think of your natural gifts . to Sonnets contain criticism that may not have give glory to God, and to win honour to been welcome to Southampton, e.g. “thou dost yourself . I will not now tell you. It suf- common grow” (Sonnet 69, line 14). Next, ficeth, that when I was farthest of all Southampton was quite an active young man in times from dissembling, I spoke freely, the 1590s: jouster, athlete, gambler, patron, and had witnesses enough. (xx) womanizer, brawler, and above all, a would-be warrior who finally got his chance and distin- Southampton was Essex’s right-hand man guished himself on the Azores voyage. But during the 1601 uprising. When they failed, Shakespeare’s praise is all of passive qualities Essex did what he could to protect his friend. such as being fair and beauteous. His poetics Kissing hands and embracing at the start of the may endlessly fascinate, but his subject matter trial, they were tried and sentenced together. can be tedious. Praise of Southampton’s mar- Though both were adjudged to die, Southamp- tial prowess by the great Essex might have ton’s life was eventually spared, though minus been more agreeable.1 titles, estates, and liberty. Third, the Rival is said to be “learned” (78, Second, Essex was rated a gifted poet by 7); it is implied that he knew the art of rhetoric, his contemporaries and was admired as a writer a major academic subject in those days (82, by Ben Jonson (who called him “noble and 10); and he had a “polished form of well- high”) and as a critic by Gabriel Harvey.