1. So now I have confess'd that he is thine,
2. And I myself am mortgaged to thy will,
3. Myself I'll forfeit, so that other mine,
4. Thou wilt restore to be my comfort still:
5. But thou wilt not, nor he will not be free,
6. For thou art covetous, and he is kind,
7. He learn'd but surety-like to write for me,
8. Under that bond that him as fast doth bind.
9. The statute of thy beauty thou wilt take,
10. Thou usurer that put'st forth all to use,
11. And sue a friend, came debtor for my sake,
12. So him I lose through my unkind abuse.
13. Him have I lost, thou hast both him and me,
14. He pays the whole, and yet am I not free.
He is Thine
Dedication: To Elizabeth
Offering the confession "that he is thine". Further as "he" is "the other mine" and the poet are "mortgaged" to Elizabeth's will. Explaining to her that she is a usurer for effectively charging a fee by withholding the child and possibly making Henry's recognition contingent on or a result of Oxford's behavior. As he alludes to losing him for his own "unkind abuse". Thus Henry appears to pay for Oxford's sins. While Oxford tells us he is not emancipated from subservience to her will.
1st Quatrain: (1-4)
Oxford submitting to Elizabeth's will and offers his anonymity for her agreement to recognize Henry. Henry is the "he" in line 1 and the "other mine" in line 3.
2nd Quatrain: (5-8)
Oxford recognizes that he knows this will not happen or else attempts some reverse psychology. Accusing Elizabeth of being avaricious in line 6. Line 7 indicates either indicates a problem for this theory or else this is merely a legal metaphor to illustrate how Henry is really the one liable for the debt should he be recognized.
3rd Quatrain: (9-12)
Oxford begins the first example of using the concept of usury in regard to holding Henry for her selfless purposes from Henry's real truth. Line 9 offers something resembling a decree offered by her scion. Lines 11 plays on the situation with the legal terminology of debtor and suits. While line 12 illustrates how Oxford laments losing his son.
couplet (13-14),
Finally Oxford expresses how Henry is the real loser in all this and yet Oxford's loses so much as well.
Commentary:
This sonnet represents a transition out of the formalized ‘Will’ sonnets yet still contains some of the same themes. With the important additional information that the execution of the desire embodied related to a mysterious third party. One belonging to the subject of the poem as in line 1 with he is thine (and thus a child). In addition it also contains the relationship to the poet as the friend he will lose and will pay the greater price. One of the clues to the arrow of time, the language of a baby no longer in evidence.
Line 2 conveys also conveys his subjugation to Elizabeth’s will. Line 3’s “that other mine” which links to the male third person personal pronouns “he” and “him” as well as the friend of line 11 are references to Henry. With the friend reference in line 11 being especially important as it is often the way Henry is referred to when addressed directly as will be seen.
That this poem is replete with legal and financial terminology is very much more apt than generally understood. Elizabeth in essence is holding Henry in a kind of debt where she profits from being the sole royal, as analogous to excessive interest charged to Henry. Yet Oxford is involved as well as the poet points out that Henry pays the whole but he is not free. Effectively also captive to her decision. What is particularly striking about this sonnet is that the third person reference to him/he does not refer to anything else like Time, Nature, etc.
Ultimately it is the shame on this same individual as will be seen in sonnet 9 that is the chief complaint of the poet. In sonnet 57 Oxford seems to inform Elizabeth that Henry does not bear this grudge.
One thing that should be clear about this is that there is no anachronism or contradiction at all with reality. Elizabeth was very fervent about the notion that all aspects of succession were the prerogatives of the monarch. And virtually no amount of pressure even from the Parliament could seemingly make her confront it. In 1593 a petition arose "to entail the succession of the crown", to no avail.
Vendler suggests that sonnet 134 “takes stock of the torment of the affair between the friend and the mistress announced in 133”. She fails to see that the friend is actually and unwitting player in this sonnet, who is lost only to Oxford in the sense that Oxford can’t be a father. Yet Elizabeth has them both as captives to her own designs. She also points out again that this poem ends where it begins and thus once again fails to see how the expression of this poem fits into a larger whole instead of expecting the poem itself to provide its own resolution.
KDJ make the assertion that the poem is a plea for mistress to release the friend from her keeping into his.
I think it is important to realize that Queen Elizabeth likely was offered no choice but to initially conceal her son after she was excommunicated by the Catholic Church in 1570 (Regnans in Excelsis)and that having a bastard son would likely have presented the much greater likelihood of the Catholic nations uniting against England.