[19] One may easily find other instances of the sporadic appearance of
the same measure in the midst of irregular "long lines" or rough
alexandrines and septenaries. Compare, for example, the following, from
early plays in Manly's _Specimens of the Pre-Shaksperean Drama_:
"To be alone, nor very convenyent." "Ye shall not touche yt, for that I
forbede." "But ye shuld be as godes resydent." "And many a chaumbyr thou
xalt have therinne." "In this flood spylt is many a mannys blood."
"Therfore be we now cast in ryght grett care."
The context of many of these lines shows that they were intended to be
read as four-stress rather than five-stress; but such examples serve to
make clear how easily English rhythm would fall into the decasyllabic
line.
[20] See also an account of Zarncke's monograph (1865) _Ueber den
fünffussiger Iambus_, in Mayor's _Chapters on English Metre_,
Postscript.
[21] See the entire Preface in Chalmers's _English Poets_, vol. viii. p.
32, and in the Appendix to Gosse's _From Shakespeare to Pope_. For an
analysis of Waller's verse with reference to this Preface, see "A Note
upon Waller's Distich," by H. C. Beeching, in the Furnivall _Miscellany_
(1901), p. 4.
[22] Beaumont's own verse is of no little interest, and Mr. Gosse, in a
recent letter to the present editor, observes that he finds in Beaumont,
"far more definitely than in George Sandys, the principal precursor of
Waller."
[23] See also the verses of Oliver Wendell Holmes on _The Strong Heroic
Line_ (in Stedman's _American Anthology_, p. 161), where he says:
"Nor let the rhymester of the hour deride The straight-backed measure
with its stately stride: It gave the mighty voice of Dryden scope; It
sheathed the steel-bright epigrams of Pope; In Goldsmith's verse it
learned a sweeter strain; Byron and Campbell wore its clanking chain; I
smile to listen while the critic's scorn Flouts the proud purple kings
have nobly worn."
[24] On the verse of Keats in general, see the remarks of Mr. Robert
Bridges in his Introduction to the Muses' Library edition of Keats.
[25] On Shelley's metres, see Mayor's _Chapters on English Metre_, 2d
ed., chap. xiv.
[26] On the verse of Surrey in general, see W. J. Courthope, in his
_History of English Poetry_, vol. ii. pp. 92-96. Mr. Courthope speaks
highly of Surrey as a metrist, in particular attributing to him certain
reforms in the handling of English verse: the attempt to use five
perfect iambic feet to the line, the harmonious placing of the cesura,
the avoidance of rime on weak syllables, the preservation of the accent
on the even-numbered syllables. (To some of these reforms, as has been
indicated, there are not a few exceptions.) In like manner ten Brink
observes that Surrey "is more successful than Wyatt in adapting foreign
rules to the rhythmical accent of the English language, and thus he is
in reality the founder of the New-English metrical system." (_English
Literature_, Kennedy trans., vol. iii. p. 243.)
On the blank verse of Surrey, see also an article by Prof. O. J.
Emerson, in _Modern Language Notes_, vol. iv. col. 466, and Mayor's
_Chapters on English Metre_, 2d ed., chap. x.
[27] The edition of 1616 has:
"One drop of blood will save me: O my Christ! Rend not my heart for
naming of my Christ!"
and omits the preceding line.
(See Bullen ed., vol. i. pp. 279, 280.)
[28] On Marlowe's verse see also Mayor's _Chapters on English Metre_, 2d
ed., chap. x.
[29] On the technical problems of Shakspere's verse, see Fleay's
_Shakspere Manual_; Abbott's _Shakespearean Grammar_; G. Browne's _Notes
on Shakspere's Versification_; and Mayor's _Chapters on English Metre_.
[30] "In a play of 2500 lines Massinger might possibly have as many as
1200 double or triple endings, Shakspere in his last period might have
as many as 850, while Fletcher would normally have at least 1700, and
might not improbably give as many as 2000." (G. C. Macaulay, in _Francis
Beaumont_, pp. 43, 44. See the entire passage on Fletcher's metre as a
test of authorship. Mr. Macaulay also remarks interestingly that
Fletcher's metrical style is an outgrowth of his general use of the
loose or disjointed, as opposed to the periodic or rounded, style of
speech. To this "Shakspere worked his way slowly," while Fletcher "seems
to have at once and naturally adopted" it.) See also Fleay's
_Shakespeare Manual_, p. 153.
[31] On Massinger's verse see also Fleay's _Shakespeare Manual_, p. 154.
[32] On Milton's verse, see, besides the entire third essay in Mr.
Symonds's book, Masson's edition of Milton, vol. iii. pp. 107-133;
Robert Bridges's _Milton's Prosody_; Mayor's _Chapters on English
Metre_, 2d ed., pp. 71-77 and 96-105; chapter xii. of Corson's _Primer
of English Verse_; and a passage in De Quincey's essay on "Milton v.
Southey and Landor," in his works, ed. Masson, vol. xi. pp. 463 ff. Says
De Quincey: "You might as well tax Mozart with harshness in the divinest
passages of _Don Giovanni_ as Milton with any such offence against
metrical science. Be assured it is yourself that do not read with
understanding, not Milton that by possibility can be found deaf to the
demands of perfect harmony."
[33] Aaron Hill (1685-1750), an admirer of Thomson, wrote a "Poem in
Praise of Blank Verse," opening:
"Up from Rhyme's poppied vale! and ride the storm That thunders in blank
verse!"
On the other hand, there were not wanting protestants against the form,
like Dr. Johnson and Goldsmith (see above, p. 205). Robert Lloyd
(1733-1764) wrote:
"Some Milton-mad (an affectation Glean'd up from college-education)
Approve no verse, but that which flows In epithetic measur'd prose;...
the metre which they call Blank, classic blank, their all in all."
(Quoted in Perry's _English Literature in the Eighteenth Century_, p.
385.)
[34] On its analysis, see Mayor's _Chapters on English Metre_, 2d ed.,
chap. xiii.