“FAREWELL LOVE, AND ALL THY
LAWS FOR EVER!” SIR THOMAS WYATT (ca.
1535) Although this SONNET by Sir THOMAS WYATT
exists in two differing manuscript forms, it was fi rst
published posthumously in 1557 as a part of TOTTEL’S
MISCELLANY under the simple heading “A renouncing of
love.” This simplicity belies complexity, as one of
Love’s “laws” is precisely its renouncement. “Love”
here is also tripartite: Love as an abstract emotion, Love
as referring to the poet’s lady, and Love as Eros or
Cupid. This three-way division is reinforced by the
pun running throughout the fi rst three lines. The
“laws” of line 1 signify the rules of love as codifi ed by
classical authors such as OVID and medieval writers
such as ANDREAS CAPELLANUS. The “baited hooks” of the
second line constitute a lure, physical bait personifi ed
by the lady, whilst the apocryphal “lore” of line 3 rep-
resents the classical PERSONIFICATION. Furthermore,
both “Senec and Plato” (l. 3) also represent Love sim-
ply by being philosophers (philosophy literally meaning
“love of knowledge”).
The second QUATRAIN’s opening on the stock image
of “blind” Love maintains the classical representation
of the fi rst quatrain and implies the present clarity of
hindsight, which continues until the poem’s end. How-
ever, the experience of Love’s “sharp repulse” and its
petty “trifl es” cannot be regretted as they are essential
to maturity; they “Hath taught me” (l. 7) and in doing
so provide the experiential evidence of that which the
speaker reads about in “Senec and Plato.” One of the
central tenets of early modern or Renaissance thought
is that the active life (vita activa) must be pursued in
correlation with book learning (vita contemplativa).
Following the VOLTA, the concluding SESTET, in
accordance with the “laws” of the sonnet, effectively
restarts the poem, but it does so with the knowledge
provided by the OCTAVE: “Therefore farewell!” Here the
spurning of Cupid’s “brittle darts” is bound up with a
sense of regret that “Love” has wasted the poet’s “time,”
representing meter, and therefore the sonnet itself. It
should be “younger hearts” who compose love poetry,
“authority” in this sense referring both to power and
author-status; it is inappropriate that the mature
speaker should do so, as “property” likewise incorpo-
rates both ownership and a sense of what is (im)proper.
The fi nal line ensures its victory by reducing the open-
ing line’s “Love” to lust—“Me lusteth no longer”—and
by reducing the formerly beloved to an unchaste body
rather than a person, constituted by “rotten boughs.”
The act of climbing these “rotten boughs” produces the
biblical fall into lust as the branches inevitably break.
The sonnet displays a dexterous use of a reduced
vocabulary rich in ambiguity. Words such as Love and
authority divide and subdivide into meanings depen-
dent on the reader’s willingness to read further as part
of a process that would peak in the ENGLISH SONNETs of
SIR PHILIP SIDNEY and WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE. For exam-
ple, the duality of mind (represented by “Senec and
Plato”) and body (represented by such physical phrases
as “sharp repulse, that pricketh aye so sore” [l. 6], “brit-
tle darts,” and “rotten boughs”) recall the insistence on
an early modern outlook. “Love” at the court of HENRY
VIII is revealed to be a fusion of expectation, experi-
ence, and refl ection. The “laws” and the “lore” are read,
the “sharp repulse” is felt, and the “time” is “lost” a sec-
ond time through relating the matter in verse.
FURTHER READING
Daalder, Joost, ed. Sir Thomas Wyatt: Collected Poems.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975.
William T. RossiterFEUDAL OATHS In the Middle Ages, when the
basic political organization was founded on a contract
between a lord and his retainers, men took oaths of
fealty to their lords in return for protection and sup-
port. The retainer (vassal) was bound to defend his
lord in military campaigns, and the lord was bound to
protect the interests of his men. For example:Robert count of Flanders pledges to king Henry
by faith and oath... that he will help him to
hold and defend the kingdom of England against
all men who can live and die... The king prom-
ises to protect count Robert in life and limb,...
and to assure him against the loss of his land...
as long as the count shall hold to these agree-
ments. And in return for these agreements and
this service king Henry will give as a fi ef to count
Robert 500 pounds of English money every
year.... (Strayer, pp. 144–145)188 “FAREWELL LOVE, AND ALL THY LAWS FOR EVER!”