of chance. We are asked to accept hypothesis piled upon hypothe-
sis, that Surrey knew the unpublished Douglas and the accessible
Italian, and that Phaer knew the unpublished Surrey (unless the
Britwell copy be like the Hargrave MS.). It seems to me that this
theory breaks of its own weight. The correspondences in the
various versions are not sufficiently striking; you read, but you
remain unconvinced. The one dominant idea you gain from the
whole discussion is of the uncertainty surrounding Surrey's text.
Until that be determined any discussion of the relation between
the different versions is necessarily futile.

The importance of this discussion lies in the fact that it involves
the early treatment of blank verse. Upon analysis, the peculiar-
ities of blank verse may be resolved into (a) the omission of
rime; (b) the use of pentameter; and (c) the use of the feet within
the line. The first seems clearly due to the influence of human-
ism. ¹ The second, on the other hand, is due to the dominance in
English of the pentameter line. There is no inherent reason why
the five-accented line should have been preferred to that having six
accents, especially as the hexameter was the meter of Vergil. At
least so thought Surrey himself as shown by his version of the Fifty-
fifth Psalm. But the pentameter line was that used in both the
rime-royal and in the heroic couplet. It therefore had the sanc-
tion of all the great writers. Logically, then, both Grimald and
Surrey adopted it. This represents the working of the English
tradition. But for the treatment within the lines Surrey especially
claimed the full measure of freedom in the placing of his accents.
As in the case of the Fifty-fifth Psalm, here also, he writes by
ear. So long as there be the five stresses in the line, the feet may
take care of themselves. One of the favorite openings is a stressed
syllable, followed by two unaccented syllables: ²

C'óldest thou hópe? Unúrst to léve my lánd?

Usually after such an opening the line becomes iambic, but it may
be as irregular as ³

Fór to prepáre, and dríve to the séa cóst.

If this be the reading, it is clear that the number of syllables,
while usually ten, is of minor importance. This explains Nott's

-540-