5r These essays on " The Literature of the Age of Elizabeth " were originally delivered as lec- tures before the Lowell Institute, in the spring of 1859, and were first printed in Tlie Atlantic Monthlij during the years 1867 and 1868. THE LITERATURE OF THE AGE OF ELIZABETH BT EDWIN P.: WHIPPLE hmmM97 BOSTON AND NEW YORK HOUGHTON, MIFFLIN AND COMPANY 1897 //^-l^ Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1869, by FIELDS, OSGOOD & CO. in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. Copyright, 1897, By CHARLOTTE B. WHIPPLE. A// rights reserved. CONTENTS. Chakacteristicsi op the Elizabethan Liteeatuee. — Maelowe 1 Shakespeaee. I 32 Shakespeaee. II 57 Ben Jonson 85 MiNOE Elizabethan Deamatists. — Heywood, Middleton, Maeston, Dekkae, Webstee, and Chapman . . . 119 Beaumont and Fletchee, Massingee, and Foed . 157 Spensee . . . . \ 189 MiNOE Elizabethan Poets. — Phineas and Giles Fletch- ee, Daniel, Deayton, Waenee, Donne, Davies, Hall, WOTTON, AND HeEBEET . 221 Sidney and Ealeigh 250 Bacon. I 278 5BAC0N. II. 306 Hooker 340 CHAEACTEEISTICS OF THE ELIZABETHAN LITEEATUEE. — MAELOWE. THE phrase " literature of the age of Elizabeth " is not confined to the literature produced in the reign of Elizabeth, but is a general name for an era in litera- ture, commencing about the middle of her reign, in 1580, reaching its maturity in the reign of James I., between 1603 and 1626, and perceptibly declining dur- ing the reign of his son. It is called by the name of Elizabeth, because it was produced in connection with influences which originated or culminated in her time, and which did not altogether cease to act after hef death ; and these influences give to its great works, whether published in her reign or in the reign of James, certain mental and moral characteristics in common. The most glorious of all the expressions of the English mind, it is, like every other outburst of national genius, essentially inexplicable in itself. It occurred, but why it occurred we can answer but loosely. We can trace some of the influences which operated on Spenser, Shakespeare, Bacon, Hooker, and Ealeigh, but the 2 CHARACTEEISTICS OF THE genesis of their genius is beyond our criticism. There was abundant reason, in the circumstances around them, why they should exercise creative power ; but the pos^ session of the power is an ultimate fact, and defies explanation. Still, the appearance of so many eminent minds in one period indicates something in the circum- stances of the period which aided and stimulated, if it did not cause, the marvel ; and a consideration of these circumstances, though it may not enable us to penetrate the mystery of genius, may still shed some light on its character and direction. ^ The impulse given to the English mind in the age of Elizabeth was but one effect of that great movement of the European mind whose steps were marked by the revival of letters, the invention of printing, the study of the ancient classics, the rise of the middle class, the discovery of America, the Reformation, the formation of national literatures, and the general clash and con- flict of the old with the new, — the old existing in de- caying institutions, the new in the ardent hopes and organizing genius by which institutions are created. If the mind was not always emancipated from error during the stir and tumult of this movement, it was still stung into activity, and compelled to think ; for if authority, whether secular or sacerdotal, is questioned, authority no less than innovation instinctively frames reasons fot v/ ELIZABETHAN LITEKATURE. 3 its existence. If power was thus driven to use the weapons of the brain, thought, in its attempt to become fact, was no less driven to use the weapons of force. Ideas and opinions were thus all the more directly per- ceived and tenaciously held, from the fact that they kindled strong passions, and frequently demanded, not merely the assent of the intellect, but the hazard of for- tune and life. At the time Elizabeth ascended the English throne, in 1558, the religious element of this movement had nearly spent its first force. There was a comparatively small band of intensely earnest Romanists, and perhaps a larger band of even more intensely earnest Puritans ; but the great majority of the people, though nominally Roman Catholics, were willing to acquiesce in the form given to the Protestant church by the Protestant state. To Elizabeth belongs the proud distinction of having been the head of the Protestant interest in Europe ; but the very word interest indicates a distinction between Protestantism as a policy and Protestantism as a faith ; and she did not hesitate to put down with a strong hand those of her subjects whose Protestantism most nearly agreed with the Protestantism she aided in France and Holland. The Puritan Reformers, though they repre- sented most thoroughly the doctrines and spirit of Lu- ther and Calvin, were thus opposed by the English 4 CHAEACTERISTICS OF THE government, and were a minority of the English peopleo Had they succeeded in reforming the national Church, the national amusements, and the national taste, ac- cording to their ideas of reform, the history and the literature of the age of Elizabeth would have been essentially different ; but they would have broken the continuity of the national life. English nature, with its basis of strong sense and strong sensuality, was hos- tile to their ascetic morality and to their practical belief in the all-excluding importance of religious con- cerns. Had they triumphed then, their very earnest- ness might have made them greater, though nobler, tyrants than the Tudors or the Stuarts ; for they would have used the arm of power to force evan- gelical faith and austere morality on a reluctant and resisting people. Sir Toby Belch would have had to fight hard for his cakes and ale ; and the nose of Bar- dolph would have been deprived of the fuel that fed its fire. The Puritans were a great force in politics, as they afterwards proved in the Parliaments of Charles and the Commonwealth ; but in the time of Elizabeth they were politically but a faction, and a faction having at one time for its head the greatest scoundrel in England, the Earl of Leicester. They were a great force in lit- erature, as they afterwards proved by Milton and Bun- yan ; but their position towards what is properly called ELIZABETHAN LITERATUEE. 5 the literature of the age of Elizabeth was strictly antag- onistical. The spirit of that literature, in its poetry, its drama, its philosophy, its divinity, was a spirit which they disliked in some of its forms, and abhorred in others. Their energies, though mighty, are therefore to be deducted from the mass of energies by which that literature was produced. And this brings us to the first and most marked char- acteristic of this literature, namely, that it is intensely__ "human. Human nature in its appetites, passions, im- perfections, vices, virtues ; in its thoughts, aspirations, imaginations ; in all the concrete forms of character in which it finds expression, in all the heights of ecstasy to which it soars, in all the depths of depravity to which it sinks, — this is what the Elizabethan literature rep- resents or idealizes ; and the total effect of this exhibi- tion of human life and exposition of human capacities, whether it be in the romance of Sidney, the poetry of Spenser, the drama of Shakespeare, the philosophy of Bacon, or the divinity of Hooker, is the wholesome and inspiring effect of beauty and cheer. This belief in hu- man nature, and tacit assumption of its right to expres- sion, could only have arisen in an age which stimulated human energies by affording fresh fields for their develop- ment, and in an age whose activity was impelled by a romantic and heroic, rather than a theological spirit. 6 CHAEACTERISTICS OF THE And the peculiar position of Elizabeth compelled her, absolute as was her temper, to act in harmony with her people, and to allow individual enterprise its largest scope. Her revenue was altogether inadequate to cany on a war with Spain and a war with Ireland, to assist the Protes- tants of France and Holland, to inaugurate gr^at schemes of American colonization, to fit out expeditions to harass the colonies and plunder the commerce of Spain, — inadequate, in short, to make England a power of the first class. But the patriotism of her people, coinciding with their interests and love of adventure, urged them to undertake public objects as commercial speculations. They made war on her enemies for the spoils to be ob- tained from her enemies. Perhaps the most compre- hensive type of the period, representing most vividly the stimulants it presented to ambition and avarice, to chivalrous sentiment and greed of gain, to action and to thought, was Sir Walter Raleigh. Poet, historian, courtier, statesman, military commander, naval com- mander, colonizer, filibuster, he had no talent and no accomplishment, no virtue and no vice, which the time did not tempt into exercise. He participated in the widely varying ambitions of Spetiser and Jonson, of Essex and Leicester, of Burleigh, Walsingham, and Sir Nicholas Bacon, of Norris and Howard of Effingham, of Drake, Hawkins, and Cumberland; and in all the&e he was thoroughly human. ELIZABETHAN LITERATURE. 13 the age. It was newspaper, magazine, novel, all in one. It was the Elizabethan " Times," the Elizabethan « Blackwood," the Elizabethan " Temple Bar " : it tempted into its arena equally the Elizabethan Thack- erays and the Elizabethan Braddons ; but the remuner- ation it afforded to the most distinguished of the swarm of playwrights who depended on it for bread was small. All experienced the full bitterness of poverty, if we ex- cept Shakespeare, Jonson, and Fletcher. Shakespeare was an excellent man of business, a part-proprietor of a theatre, and made his fortune. Jonson was patronized by James, and was as much a court poet as a popular poet. Fletcher, though the most fertile of the three in the number of his plays, and the greatest master of theatrical effect, did not, it is supposed, altogether de- pend on the stage for his support. But Chapman, Dek- kar. Field, E-owley, Massinger, and all the other pro- fessional playwrights, were wretchedly poor. And it must be said, that, though we are in the custom of affirming that the circumstances of the age of Elizabeth were pre-eminently favorable to literature, most of the writers, including such men as Spenser and Jonson, were in the habit of moaning or grumbling over its degeneracy, and of wishing that they had been born in happier times. There were, then, three centres for the literature of the period, — the Court, the Church, and the Theatre. 14 CHAKACTERISTICS OF THE Let us consider the drama first, as it was nearer the popular heart, was the medium through which the grandest as well as meanest minds found expression, and was thoroughly national, or at least thoroughly nation- alized. England had a drama as early as the twelfth century, — a drama used by the priests as a mode of amusing the people into a knowledge of religion. Its products were called Miracle Plays. They were written, and often acted, by ecclesiastics ; they represented the per- sons and events of the Scriptures, of the apocryphal Gospels, and of the legends of saints and martyrs, and were performed sometimes in the open air, on tempo- rary stages and scaffolds, sometimes in churches and chapels. The earliest play of this sort of which w^e have any record was performed between the years 1100 and 1110. The general characteristic of these plays, if we should speak after the ideas of our time, was blasphemy, and blasphemy of the worst kind ; for the irreverent utterance of sacred names is venial compared with the irreverent representation of sacred persons. The object of the writers was to bring Christianity within popular apprehension ; and in the process they burlesqued it. They belonged to a class of writers and speakers, as common now as then, who vulgarize the highest subjects in the attempt to popularize them,— ELIZABETHAN LITEEATURE 15 who degrade religion in the attempt to make it efficient. The writers of the Miracle Plays only appear worse than their Protestant successors, from the greater rude- ness in the minds and manners to which they appealed, hey did not aim to lift the people up, but to drag the Divinity down ; and, not being in any sense poets, they could not make what was sacred familiarly apprehended, and at the same time preserve that ideal remoteness from ordinary life which is the condition of its being reverently apprehended. Their religious dramas, accord- ingly, were mostly monstrous farces, full of buffi)onery and indecency, though not without a certain coarse humor and power of characterization. Thus, in the play of the Deluge, Noah and his wife are close copies of contemporary character and manners, projected on the Bible narrative. Mrs. Noah is a shrew and a vixen ; refuses to leave her gossips and go into the' ark ; scolds Noah, and is soundly whipped by him ; then wishes herself a widow, and thinks she but echoes the feeling of all the wives in the audience, in hoping for them the same good luck. Noah then takes occasion to inform all the husbands present that their proper course is to break in their wives after his fashion. By this time the water is nearly up to his wife's neck, and she is partly coaxed and partly forced into the ark by one of her sons. Again, in a play on the Adoration of the 16 CHAEACTERISTICS OF THE Shepherds, the shepherds are three English boors, who meet with a variety of the most coarsely comical adven- tures in their journey to Bethlehem ; who, just before the star in the east appears, get into a quarrel and fight, after having feasted on Lancashire jammocks and Hal- ton ale ; and who, when they arrive at their destination, present three gifts to the infant Saviour, namely, a bird, a tennis-ball, and a bob of cherries. The Miracle Plays were very popular, and did not altogether die out before the reign of James. In some of them personified abstractions came to be blended with the persons of the drama ; and in the fifteenth century a new class of dramatic « performances arose, called Moral Plays, in which these personified abstrac- tions pushed persons out of the piece, and ethics sup- planted theology. There is, in some of these Moral Plays, a great deal of ingenuity displayed in the impersonation and allegorical representation of quali- ties. They took strong hold of the English mind. Pride, gluttony, sensuality, j^orldliness, meekness, tem- perance, faith, in their single and in their blended action, were often happily characterized ; and, though they were eventually banished from the drama, they reappeared in the pageants of Elizabeth and in the poetry of Spenser. But their popularity was doubtless owing more to their fun than their ethics ; and the two ELIZABETHAN LITERATURE. 17 characters of the Devil and Vice, the laughable monster and the laughable buffoon, were the darlings of the multitude. In Ben Jonson's " Staple of News," Gossip Tattle exclaims : " My husband, Timothy Tattle, God rest his soul ! was wont to say that there was no play without a fool and a Devil in 't : he was for the Devil still, God bless him ! The Devil for his money, he would say ; I would fain see the Devil." Nearer to the modern Play than either the Miracle or the Moral, was the Interlude, so called from its being acted in the intervals of a banquet. It was a farce in one act, and devoted to the humorous and satirical representation of contemporary manners and charac- ter, especially professional character. John Ileywood, the jester of Henry VIIL, was the best maker of these Interludes. At the time that all of these three forms of the drama ^were more or less in esteem, Nicholas Udall, a classical scholar, produced, about the year 1540, the first English comedy, "Ralph Roister Doister," — very much supe- rior, in incident and characterization, to " Gammer Gur- ton's Needle," written twenty years afterwards, though neither rises above the mere prosaic delineation, the first of civic, the last of country life. The poetic ele- ment, which was afterwards so conspicuous in the Eliza- bethan drama, did not even appear in the first English B 18 CHARACTEKISTICS OF THE tragedy, " Gorboduc," though it was written by Thomas Sackville, the author of the Induction to the " Mirror of Magistrates," and the only great poet that arose be- tween Chaucer and Spenser. " Gorboduc " was acted before Queen Ehzabeth at Whitehall, by the Gentlemen of the Inner Temple, in January, 1562. It was re- ceived with great applause ; but it appears, as read now, singularly frigid and unimpassioned, with not even, as Campbell says, " the unities of space and time to cir- cumscribe its dulness." It has all the author's justness, weight, and fertility of thought, but little of his imagi- nation ; and though celebrated as the first English play written in blank verse, the measure, in Sackville's hands, is wearisomely monotonous, and conveys no notion of the elasticity and variety of which it was afterwards found capable, when used by Marlowe and Shakespeare. The tragedy is not deficient in terrible events, but even its murders make us yawn. It is probable that the fifty-two plays performed at court between 1568 and 1580, and of which nothing is preserved but the names, contained little to make us regret their loss. Neither at the Royal Palace, nor the Inns of Court, nor the Universities, — at all of which plays were performed, — could a free and original national drama be built up. This required a public theatre, and an audience composed of all classes of the people. Ac- ELIZABETHAN LITERATURE. 19 cordiDgly, tlie most important incident in the history of the English stage was the patent granted by the crown, in 1574, to James Burbage and his associates, players under the protection of the Earl of Leicester, to per- form in the City and Liberties of London, and in all other parts of the kingdom ; " as well," the phraseology runs, " for the recreation of our loving subjects, as for our own solace and pleasure, when we shall think fit to see them." But the Corporation of London, thorough Puritans, were determined, as far as their power extended, to prevent the Queen's subjects from having any such " recreation," and her Majesty herself from enjoying any such " solace and pleasure." " Forasmuch as the playing of interludes, and the resort to the same, are very dangerous for the infection of the plague, whereby infinite burdens and losses to the city may increase ; and are very hurtful in corruption of youth with inconti- nence and lewdness ; and also great wasting both of the time and thrift of many poor people ; and great provok- ing of the wrath of God, the ground of all plagues ; great withdrawing of the people from public prayer, and from the service of God ; and daily cried out against by all preachers of the word of God ; — therefore," the . Corporation ordered, " all such interludes in public places, and the resort to the same, shall wholly be pro- 20 CHARACTEEISTICS OF THE hibited as ungodly, and humble suit made to the Lords, that like prohibitation be in places near the city." The players, thus expelled the city, withdrew to the nearest point outside the Lord Mayor's jurisdiction, and, in 1576, erected their theatre in Blackfriars. Two thea- tres, " The Curtain " and " The Theatre," were erected by other companies in Shoreditch. Before the end of the century there were at least eleven. To these round wooden buildings, open to the sky, with only a thatched roof over the stage, the people flocked daily for mental excitement. There was no movable scenery ; the female characters were played by boys ; and the lowest thea- tres of our day are richer in appointments than were the finest of the age of Elizabeth. " Such," says Malone, " was the poverty of the old stage, that the same person played two or three parts ; and battles on which the fate of an empire was supposed to depend were decided by three combatants on a side." It is difficult for us to conceive of the popularity of the stage in those days. One of the spies of Secretary Walsingham, writing to his employer in 1586, thus groans over the taste of the people : " The daily abuse of stage plays is such an offence to the godly, and so great a hindrance to the Gospel, as the Papists do exceedingly rejoice at the blemish thereof, and not without cause ; for every day in "the week the player's bills are set up in sundry places ELIZABETHAN LITERATUEE. 21 of the city ; .... so that, when the bells toll to the lecturer, the trumpets sound to the stages. Whereat the wicked faction of Rome laugheth for joy, while the godly weep for sorrow It is a woful sight to see two hundred proud players jet in their silks, while five hundred poor people starve in the streets Woe is me ! the play-houses are pestered when the churches are naked. At the one, it is not possible to get a place ; at the other, void seats are plenty." It may here be said, that the mutual hostility of the players and the Puritans continued until the suppression of the theatres under the Commonwealth ; and for fifty or sixty years the Puritans were only mentioned by the dramatists to be mercilessly satirized. Even Shakespeare's catholic mind was^ not broad enough to include them in the range of its sympathies. That this opposition to the stage by the staid and sober citizens was not without cause, soon became mani- fest. The characteristic of the drama, before Shake- speare, was intellectual and moral lawlessness ; and most of the dramatists were men as destitute of eminent genius as of common principle. Stephen Gosson, a Puritan, in a tract published in 1581, attacks them on grounds equally of taste and morals ; and five years afterwards Sir Philip Sidney speaks of the popular plays as against all " rules of honest civility and skilful 22 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE poetry." But Gosson indicates also the sources of their plots. Painter's " Palace of Pleasure," a series of not over-modest tales from the Italian ; " The Golden Ass " ; " The Ethiopian History " ; " Amadis of France " ; "The Round Table " ; — all the licentious comedies in Latin, French, Italian, and Spanish were thoroughly ran- sacked, he tells us, " to furnish the play-houses of Lon- don." The result, of course, was a chaos ; but a chaos whose materials were wide and various, indicating that the English mind was in contact with, and attempting roughly .to reproduce, the genius of Greece and Rome^ of France, Spain, and Italy, the chronicles and ro- mances of the Middle Ages, and was hospitable to intel- lectual influences from all quarters. What was needed was the powerful personality and shaping imagination of genius, to fuse these seemingly heterogeneous materials into new and original forms. " The Faerie Queene " of Spenser, and the drama of Shakespeare, evince the same assimilation of incongruous elements which Gosson derides and denounces as it appeared in the shapeless works of mediocrity. There was not merely to be a new drama, but a new art, and new principles of criticism to legitimate its creative audacities. The materials were rich ani various. The difficulty was, that to combine them into original forms required genius, and genius higher, broader, more energetic, more imagi- ELIZABETHAN LITEEATURE 23 native, and more humane tban had ever before been directed to dramatic composition. The immediate predecessors of Shakespeare — Greene, Lodge, Kyd, Peele, Marlowe>P^ Were all educated at the Universities, and weref naturally prejudiced in favor of the classics. But they were, at the same time, wild Bohemian youths, thrown upon the world of London to turn their talents and accomplishments into the means of livelihood or the means of debauch. They depended principally on the popular theatres, and of course a,d- dressed the popular mind. Why, indeed, should they write according to the rules of the classic drama ? The classic drama was a growth from the life of the times in which it appeared. Its rules were simply generaliza- tions from the practice of classic dramatists. A drama suited to the tastes and wants of the people of Greece or Rome was evidently not suited to the tastes and wants of the people of England. The whole frame- work of society, — customs, manners, feelings, aspira- tions, traditions, superstitions, religion, — had changed ; and, as the drama is a reflection of life, either as actu- ally existing or ideally existing, it is evident that both the experience and the sentiments of the English audi- ences demanded that it should be the reflection of a new life. These draniatists, however, in emancipating themselves from the literary jurisprudence of Greece 24 CHARACTEEISTICS OF THE and Rome, put little but individual caprice in its place. Released from formal rules, they did not rise into the artistic region of principles, but fell into the pit of anar- chy and mere lawlessness. Lacking the higher imagi- nation which conceives living" ideas and organizes living works, their dramas evince no coherence, no subordina- tion of parts, no grasp of the subject as a whole. There is a German play in which Adam is represented as pass- ing across the stage, " going to be created." The drama of the age of Elizabeth, in the persons of Greene, Peele, Kyd, and others, indicates, in some such rude way, that it is " going to be created." That this dramatic shapelessness was not inconsistent with single poetic conceptions of the greatest force and fineness, might be proved by abundant quotations. Lodge, for example, was a poor dramatist ; but what living poet would not be proud to own this exquisite description, in his lyric of " Rosaline," of the person and influence of beauty ? " Like to the clear in highest sphere, Where all imperial glory shines, Of selfsarae color is her hair, Whether unfolded or in twines. " Her eyes are sapphires set in snow, Refining heaven by every wink ; The gods do fear whenas they glow. And I do tremble when I think. ELIZABETHAN LITEEATURE. 25 *' Her cheeks are like the blushing cloud That beautifies Aurora's face; Or like the silver-crimson shroud, That Phoebus' smiling looks doth grace " Her lips are like two budded roses, Whom ranks of lUies neighbor nigh, -Within which bounds she balm encloses, Apt to entice a deity. '^ Her neck like to a stately tower, Where Love himself imprisoned lies. To watch for glances every hour From her divine and sacred eyes. " With orient pearl, with ruby red, With marble white, with sapphire blue, Her body everyway is fed, Yet soft in touch, and sweet in view. " Nature herself her shape admu-es ; The gods are wounded in her sight ; And Love forsakes his heavenly fires, And at her eyes his brand doth light." But a more potent spirit than any we have men^ tioned, and the greatest of Shakespeare's predecessors, was Christopher Marlowe, a man of humble parentage, but with Norman blood in his brains, if not in his veins. He was, indeed, the proudest and fiercest of intellectual aristocrats. The son of a shoemaker, and born in 1564, his unmistakable genius seems to have gained him 2 26 MARLOWE. friends, who looked after his early education, and sent him, at the age of seventeen, to the University of Cam- bridge. He ^ was intended for the Cliurch, but the Church had evidently no attractions for him. The study of theology appears to have resulted in making him an enemy of religion. There was, indeed, hardly a Chris- tian element in his untamable nature ; and, though he was called a sceptic, infidelity in him took the form of blasphemy rather than of denial. He was made up of vehement passions, vivid imagination, and lawless self-will ; and what Hazlitt calls " a hunger and thirst after unrighteousness " assumed the place of conscience in his haughty and fiery spirit. Before the age of twenty-three we find him in London, an actor and a writer for the stage, and the author of the " great sensa- tion work " of his time, — the tragedy of " Tambur- laine." This portentous melodrama, a strange com- pound of inspiration and desperation, has the mark of power equally on its absurdities and its sublimities. The first play written in blank verse for the popular stage, its verse has an elasticity, freedom, and variety of move- ment which makes it as much the product of Marlowe's mind as the thoughts and passions it conveys. It had no precedent in the verse of preceding writers, and is constructed, not on mechanical rules, but on vital prin- ciples. It is the efl:brt of a glowing mind, disdaining to MAELOWE. 27 creep along paths previously made, and opening a new path for itself. This scornful intellectual daring, the source of Marlowe's originality, is also the source of his defects. In the tragedy of " Tamburlaine " he selects for his hero a character through whom he can express his own extravagant impatience of physical obstacles and moral restraints. No regard is paid to reality, even in the dramatic sense of the word : a shaggy and savage force dominates over everything. The writer seems to say, with his truculent hero, " This is my mind, and I will have it so." This self-asserting intellectual inso- lence is accompanied by an unwearied energy, which half redeems the bombast into which it runs, or rather rushes ; and strange gleams of the purest splendors of poetry are continually transfiguring the bully into the bard. Thus, in the celebrated scene in which Tamburlaine is represented in a chariot drawn by captive kings, and berating them for their slowness in words which so cap- tivated Ancient Pistol, there is a glorious stroke of impassioned imagination, which makes us almost forgive the swaggering fustian which precedes and follows it : — " Hallo ! ye pampered jades of Asia ! What, can ye draw but twenty miles a day ? — The horse that guide the golden eye of heaven, 28 MARLOWE. And blow the morning from their nostrils, Making their fiery gait above the clouds, Are not so honored in their governor As you, ye slaves, in mighty Tamburlaine." « Faustus," " The Jew of Malta," " Edward the Sec- ond," " The Massacre of Paris," " Dido, Queen of Car- thage," are the names of Marlowe's remaining plays. They all, more or less, exhibit the eager creativeness of his mind, and the furious arrogance of his disposition. " They abound," says Hunt, " in wilful and self-worship- ping speeches, and every one of them turns upon some kind of ascendency at the expense of other people." His " Edward the Second " is the best historical play written before Shakespeare's, and exhibits more discrim- ination in delineating character than any of Marlowe's other efforts. His " Jew of Malta " is a powerful con- ception, marred in the process of embodiment. His " Faustus " perhaps best reflects his whole genius and experience. The subject must have taken strong hold of his nature, for, like Faustus, he had himself doubt- less held intimate business relations with the great enemy of mankind, and was personally conscious of the struggle in the soul between the diabolical and the di- vine. The characters of Faustus and Mephistopheles are both conceived with great depth and strength of imagination ; and the last scene of the play, exhibiting MARLOWE. 29 the agony of supernatural terror in which Faustus awaits the coming of the fiend who has bought and paid for his soul, is not without touches of sublimitja There is one line, especially, which is loaded with meaning and suggestiveness, — that in which harbor- ing for a moment the possibility of salvation amid the gathering horrors of his doom, Faustus exclaims, — " See where Christ's blood streams in the firmament! " Marlowe's life, though short and reckless, was fertile in works. Besides the plays we have mentioned, he prob- ably wrote many which have been lost ; and his trans- lations from Ovid, and his unfinished poem of " Hero and Leander," would alone give him a position among the poets of his period. He was killed in a tavern brawl, in the year 1593, at the early age of twenty-nine.* * Beard, in his "Theatre of God's Judgments" (1597), makes his death the occasion to point a ferocious moral. He speaks of him as " by practice a play-maker and a poet of scurrilitie, who, by giuing too large a swing to his owne wit, and suffering his lust to haue the fall reines," at last " denied God and his somie Christ, and not onely in word blasphemed the Trinitie, but also (as it is credibly reported) wrote bookes against it, affirming our Sauiour to be but a deceiuer, and Moses to be but a coniurer and seducer of the people, and the Holy Bible to bee but vaine and idle stories, and aU religion but a deuice of policie. But see what a hooke the Lord put in the nostrils of this barking dogge I So it fell out, that, as he purposed to stab one whom he ought a grudge vnto, wiln his dagger, the other party 30 MAELOWE. Though Marlowe's poetical contemporaries and follow- ers could say little or nothing in defence of his life, when it was mercilessly assailed by Puritan pamphlet- eers, there was no lack of testimonials to his genius. Ben Jonson celebrated " his mighty line " ; Drayton de- scribed his raptures as " all fire and air," and testified to his possession of those " brave, sublunary things that the first poets had"; and Chapman, with a yet closer perception of his unwithholding self-committal to the Muse, said that "He stood Up to the diin in the Pierian flood." A still higher tribute to his eminence comes from Shakespeare himself, who, in his "As You Like It," quotes with approval a line from Marlowe's poem of " Hero and Leander," — the only case in which Shake- speare has publicly recognized the genius of an Eliza- bethan writer. perceiuing so auoyded the stroke, that withall catching hold of his wrist, hee stabbed tiis owne dagger into his owne head, in such sort that, notwithstanding all the meanes of surgerie that could bee wrought, hee shortly after died thereof ; the manner of his death being so terrible (for he euen cursed and blasphemed to his last gape, and together with his breath an oath flew out of his mouth), that it was not only a manifeste signe of God's judgement, but also an hoi'- Tible and fearefull terror to all that beheld him. But herein did the justice of God most noteably appeare, in that hee compelled his owne hand, which had written these blasphemies, to bee the instrument to punish him, and that in his braine which had deuised the same." MAELOWE. 31 But this stormy, irregular genius, compound of Alsa- tian ruffian and Arcadian singer, whose sudden death, in the height of his glory and his pride, seemed to threaten the early English drama with irreparable loss, was to be succeeded in his own walk by the greatest Englishman, by the greatest man, that ever made the theatre or literature his medium of communication with the world. To some thoughts on this man — need we say it is Shakespeare ? — we shall invite the attention of the reader in the next chapter. SHAKESPEAEE. I. rriHE biography of Shakespeare, if we merely look at the bulk of the books which assume to record it, is both minute and extensive ; but when we subject the octavo or quarto to examination, we find a great deal that is interesting about his times, and some shrewd and some dull guessing-about his probable actions and mo- tives, but little about himself except a few dates. He was born in Stratford-on-Avon, in April, 1564, and was the son of John Shakespeare, tradesman, of that place. In 1582, in his nineteenth year, he married Anne Hath- away, aged twenty-six. About the year 1586 he went to London and became a player. In 1589 he was one of the proprietors of the Blackfriars Theatre, and in 1595 was a prominent shareholder in a larger theatre, built by the same company, called the Globe. As a playwright he seems to have served an apprenticeship ; for he altered, amended, and added to the dramas of others before he produced any himself. Between the year 1591, or thereabouts, and the year 1613, or thereabouts, he wrote over thirty plays, the precise date SHAKESPEARE. 33 of whose composition it is hardly possible to fix. He seems to have made yearly visits to Stratford, where his wife and children resided, and to have invested money there as he increased in wealth. Mr. Emerson has noted, that about the time he was writing Macbeth, per- haps the greatest tragedy of ancient or modern times, " he sued Philip Rogers, in the borough-court of Strat- ford, for thirty-five shillings tenpence, for corn delivered to him at various times." In 1608, Mr. Collier esti- mates his income at four hundred pounds a year, which, allowing for the decreased value of money, is equal to eight or nine thousand dollars at the present time. About the year 1610, he retired permanently to Strat- ford, though he continued to write plays for the com- pany with which he was connected. He died on the 23d of April, 1616. Such is essentiallj' the meagre result of a century of research into the external life of Shakespeare. As there is hardly a p^^ge in his writings which does not shed more light upon the biography of his mind, and bring us nearer to the individuality of the man, the an- tiquaries in despair have been compelled to abandon him to the psychologists ; and the moment the transition from external to internal facts is made, the most obscure of men passes into the most notoricus. For this person- ality and soul we call Shakespeare, ^he recorded inci- 2* C 34 SHAKESPEARE. dents of whose outward career were so few and trifling, lived a more various life — a life more crowded with ideas, passions, volitions, and events — than any poten- tate the world has ever seen. Compared with his ex- perience, the experience of Alexander or Hannibal, of Caesar or Napoleon, was narrow and one-sided. He had projected himself into almost all the varieties of human character, and, in imagination, had intensely realized and lived the life of each. From the throne of the monarch to the bench of the village alehouse, there were few positions in which he had not placed himself, and which he had not for a time identified with his own. No other man had ever seen nature and hu- man life from so many points of view ; for he had looked upon them through the eyes of Master Slender and Hamlet, of Caliban and Othello, of Dogberry and Mark Antony, of Ancient Pistol and Julius Caesar, of Mistress Tearsheet and Imogen, of Dame Quickly and Lady Mac- beth, of Robin Goodfellow and Titania, of Hecate and Ariel. No king or queen of his time had so completely felt the cares and enjoyed the dignity of the regal state as this playwright, who usurped it by his thought alone ; and the freshest and simplest maiden in Europe had no innocent heart-experience which this man could not share, — escaping, in an instant, from the shattered brain of Lear, or the hag-haunted imagination of Macbeth, in SHAKESPEAEE. 35 order to feel the tender flutter of her soul in his own. And none of these forms, though mightier or more ex- quisite than the ordinary forms of humanity, could hold or imprison him a moment longer than he chose to abide in it. He was on an excursion through the world of thought and action, to seize the essence of all the ex- citements of human nature, — terrible, painful, criminal, rapturous, or humorous ; and to do this in a short earthly career, he was compelled to condense ages into days, and lives into minutes. He exhausts, in a short time, all the glory and all the agony there is on the throne or on the couch of Henry IV., and then, wearied with royalty, is off to the Boar's Head to have a rouse with Sir John. He feels all the flaming pride and scorn of the aristocrat Coriolanus; his brain widens with the imperial ideas, and his heart beats with the measureless ambition, of the autocrat Caesar; and anon he has donned a greasy apron, plunged into the roaring Roman mob, and is yelling against aristocrat and autocrat with all the gusto of democratic rage. He is now a prattling child, and in a second he is the murderer with the knife ftt its throat. Capable of heing all that he actually or imaginatively sees, he enters into at will, and abandons at will, the passions that brand or blast other natures. Avarice, malice, envy, jealousy, hatred, revenge, remorse, neither in their separate nor mutual action are strong 36 SHAKESPEARE. enough to fasten him ; and the same may be said of love and pity and friendship and joy and ecstasy ; for behind and within this muUiform personaUty is the person Shakespeare, — serene, self-conscious, vigilant, individ- ualizing the facts of his consciousness, and pouring his own soul into each creation, without ever parting with the personal identity which is at the heart of all, which disposes and co-ordinates all, and which dictates the impression to be left by all. And this fact conducts us to the question of Shake- speare's individuality. We are prone to place him as a man below other great men, because we make a distinc- tion between the man and his genius. We gather our notion of Shakespeare from the meagre details of his biography, and in his biography he appears little and commonplace, — not by any means so striking a person as Kit Marlowe or Ben Jonson. To this individuality we tack on a universal genius, — which is about as rea- sonable as it would be to take the controlling power of gravity from the sun and attach it to one of the aste- roids. Shakespeare's genius is not something distinct from the man ; it is the expression of the man, just as the sun's attraction is the result of its immense mass. The measure of a man's individuality is his creative power ; and all that Shakespeare created he individually included. We must, therefore, if we desire to grasp hij SHAKESPEAEE. 37 greatness, discard from our minds all associations con- nected with the pet epithets which other authors have condescended to shower upon him, such as " Sweet Will," and " Gentle Shakespeare," and " Fancy's child," — fond but belittling phrases, as little appropriate as would be the patronizing chatter of the planet Venus about the dear, darling little Sun; — we must discard all these from our conceptions, and consider him prima- rily as a vast, comprehensive, personal soul and force, that passed from eternity into time, with all the wide aptitudes and affinities for the world he entered bound up in his individual being from the beginning. These aptitudes and affinities, these quick, deep, and varied sympathies, were so many inlets of the world without him ; and facts pouring into such a nature were swiftly organized into faculties. Nothing, indeed, amazes us so much, in the biography of Shakespeare's mind, as the preternatural rapidity with which he assimilated knowl- edge into power, and experience into insight. The might of his personality is indicated by its resistance to, as much as its breadth is evinced by its receptivity of, objects ; for his force was never overwhelmed or sub- merged by the multiplicity of impressions that unceas- ingly rushed in upon it. His soul lay genially open to the world of nature and human life, to receive the ob- jects that went streaming into it, but Clever parted with 38 SHAKESPEAEE. the power of reacting upon all it received. This would not be so marvellous had he merely taken in the forms and outside appearances of things. All his perceptions, however, were vital ; and the life and force of the ob- jects he drew into his consciousness tugged with his own life and force for the mastery, and ended in simply enriching the spirit they strove to subdue. This inde- structible spiritual energy, which becomes mightier with every exercise of might ; which plucks out the heart and absorbs the vitality of everything it touches ; which daringly commits itself to the fiercest, and joyously to the softest passions, without losing its moral and mental sanity; which in the most terrible excitements is as " tlie blue dome of air " to the tempest that rages be- neath it ; which, aiming to include everything, refuses to be included by anything, and in the sweep of its creativeness acts with a confident audacity, as if in it Nature were humanized and humanity individualized ; — in short, this unexampled energy of blended sensibility, intelligence, and will, is what constitutes the man Shake- speare ; and this man is no mere name for an impersonal, unconscious genius, that did its marvels by instinct, no name for a careless playwright who blundered into mir- acles, but is essentially a person, creating strictly within the limitations of his individuality, — within those limi- tations appearing to be impersonal only because he is SHAKESPEAEE. 39 compreliensive enough to cover a wide variety of special natures, — and, above all, a person individually as great, at least, as tlie sum of his whole works. In regard to the real mystery of this man's power, both criticism and philosophy are mute. His appear- ance is simply a fact in the world's intellectual history, which can be connected with no preceding fact nor with the spirit of his age. " It is the nature of poetry," says Emerson, " to spring, like the rainbow daughter of Wonder, from the invisible, to abolish the past, and to refuse all history." All that we know is, that the ca- pacities and splendors of Shakespeare's mind existed potentially in the vital germ of the spiritual nature born with him into the world ; and that his works are the result of the unfolding of this. The glory of the Eliza- bethan age, it is absurd to call him its product, for the puzzle is not so much the peculiarities of what he assim- ilated as his powers of assimiliation, and in any age these powers would probably have worked equal, if different effects. Take, for instance, single thoughts and imaginations of his, such as the following, and see if you can account for them by any knowledge you have of the manners and customs of the England of Eliza- beth : — " The morning steals upon the night, Melting the darkness." 40 SHAKESPEAEE. " How sweet the moonlight sleeps upon this bank! '* " The benediction of these covering heavens Fall on their heads like dew." Things evil " are our outward consciences." A substitute shines brightly as a king, Until a king be by; and then his state Empties itself, as doth an inland brook Into the main of waters." Westmoreland ! thou art a summer bird, Which ever in the haunch of winter sings The lifting up of day." " Cheer your heart : Be you not troubled with the time, which drives O'er your content these strong necessities; But let determined things to Destiny Hold mibewailed their way." But single passages like these, though they hint of the inmost essence of the poet, and drop upon the mind, as Carlyle says, " like a splendor out of heaven," — though they demonstrate the independence of time and place of the imagination whence they come, -^- are still no adequate measure of Shakespeare's power. If, how- ever, we pass from these to what is a more decisive test of his self-conscious, self-directed creative energy, namely, to his mode of organizing a whole drama, we shall find that his method, processes, and results are SHAKESPEARE. 41 different from those of the draraatists of his own age or of any other age. The materials he uses are as nothing when compared with his transformation of them into works of art. Let us, in illustration, glance at his method of creation, as successfully exerted in any one of his great dramas, say Hamlet, or King Lear, or Mac- beth, or Othello. He takes a story or a history, with which the people are familiar, the whole interest of which is narrative. He finds it a mere succession of incidents ; he leaves it a combination of events. He finds the persons named in it mere commonplace sketches of humanity ; he leaves them self-subsisting, individual characters, more real to the mind than the men and women we daily meet. Now the first fact that strikes us when we compare the original story with Shakespeare's magical transform- ation of it is, that everything is raised from the actual world into a Shakespearian world. He alters, enlarges, expands, enriches, enlivens, informs, recreates every- thing, lifting sentiment, passion, humor, thought, action, to the level of his own nature. Through incidents and through characters is shot Shakespeare's soul, — a soul that yields itself to every mould of being, from the clown to the monarch, endows every class of character it animates with the Shakespearian felicity and certainty of speech, and, being in all as well as in each, so con- 42 SHAKESPEAEE. nects and relates the society he has called into lif\ that they unite to form a whole, while existing with perfect distinctness as parts. The characters are not developed by isolation, but by sympathy or collision, and the closer they come together the less they run together. They are independent of each other, and yet necessitate each other. None of them could appear in any other play without exciting disorder ; yet in this play their discord conduces to the general harmony. And so tough is the hold on existence of these beings that, though thousands of millions of men and women have been born, have died, and have been forgotten since they were created, and though the actual world has strangely changed, these men and women of Shakespeare's are still alive, and Shakespeare's world still remains untouched by time. This drama, thus made self-existent in the free heaven of art, implies, in its conception and execution, processes analogous to those which are followed by Nature her- self in the production of her works ; and modern critics have not hesitated to award to Shakespeare the distinc- tion of being an organizer after her pattern. The drama which we have been describing is, like her works, not simple, but complex. It has unity, it has the widest variety, it has unity in variety. The most diverse and seemingly heterogeneous materials all aid to form a SHAKESPEARE. 43 whole, " vital in every part " ; and the organization is strictly an addition to the world, with nothing in litera- ture and nothing in nature which exactly matches it. And it is alive, and refuses to die. Nature herself is compelled to adopt it into her race, " And give to it an equal date With Andes and witli Ararat." You can gaze at it as you can gaze at a natural land- scape, where hills, rocks, woods, stubble, grass, clouds, sky, atmosphere, each separate, each related, combine to form one impressive effect of beauty and power. Perhaps, however, it would be more proper to call this Shakespearian drama an approximation to an or- ganic product, rather than a realization of one. The processes of nature are followed, but the perfection of nature is the ideal it aims at rather than reaches. Still, if we allow for human defects and imperfections, and take into view the fact that Shakespeare had to submit to conditions imposed by his audience as well as condi- tions imposed by his genius, his work measurably fulfils the requirements of Kant's concise definition of an or- ganic creation, namely, "that thing in which all the parts are mutually ends and means." Admitting, then, that the drama we are considering has organic form, and not merely mechanical regularity, the question arises, What is the inner law, the central 44 SHAKESPEAKE. idea, the principle of life, by whieh, and in obedience to which, it was organized ? Perhaps the new school of philosophic critics have done almost as much injury to Shakespeare's fame, in their attempt to answer this question, as they have done good in rescuing his dramas from the old school of sciolists and commentators, who were pecking at him with their formal rules of taste. The philosophic critics very properly insisted that he should be judged by principles deduced from his own method, and not by rules g^ieralized from the method of the Greek dramatists ; that the laws by which he should be tried were the laws which he acknowledged and obeyed, the laws of his own creative imagination ; and that the very originality of his dramas freed them from tests whi<5li are applicable only to the products of imitation. They thus raised Shakespeare from a bueaker of the laws into a lawgiver ; and the brilliant vagabond, whom eyery catchpole of criticism thouglit he could hustle about and reprimand, wa^ all at once lifted into a dictator of law to the bench. Having relieved Shakespeare from these pc^icemen of lett-ers, and substituted some reach of human vision for their rat'« eyes, the new school of philosophic critics proceeded to state what were the ideas which formed the gr>ound-plans and organizing principles of his works ; but in doing this, thay brought Shakespeare down to SHAKESPEAEE. 46 their own level, and made him their spokesman. Intel- lectual egotism supplanted intellectual interpretation. Read Schlegel, Ulrici, even Gervinus, and you are de- lighted as long as they confine themselves to the busi- ness of exposing the folly of the critics they supplanted ; but when they come to the real problem, and attempt to state the meaning and purpose of Shakespeare in any given play, you are apt to be as much surprised as was that philanthropist, who was confidentially informed that the ultimate object Napoleon had in view in his nu- merous wars was the establishment of Sunday schools. They find in Shakespeare's plays certain ethical, politi- cal, or social generalities, which, it seems, they were written to illustrate, or rather from which the plays grow, as from so many roots. But causes are to be measured by effects ; the effects here are marvellous structures of genius ; and these do not shoot up from the withered roots of barren truisms. A whole must be greater than any of its parts; and yet the philosophic idea of a Shakespearian drama, as eliminated by the German professors, is less than the least of its parts. A single magical word in Shakespeare is often greater, and has more reach of application, than the professorial bit of wisdom which they present as the grand total of the play, and which is often too obvious in itself to make a resort to Shakespeare necessary for a perception of 46 SHAKESPEARE. its truth. Their " ground ideas " of the dramas are not worth any minor Shakespearian ideas they are assumed to include. Indeed, before we claim to understand a Shake- spearian whole, ws must first see if we are competent to take in one of its parts. It is evident that the most important parts are the characters, and in respect to these, and to Shakespeare's method of characterization, there is much misconception. What are these charac- ters ? Are they copies of men and women, as we see them in the world, — slightly idealized portraits of per- sons, witty, passionate, thoughtful, or criminal? Are they such people as Shakespeare might have seen in the streets of London in the time of Elizabeth? No, for they are plainly Shakespearian, and not merely Eliza- bethan. Even the court-fools are endowed with the Shakespearian quality, are perfect of their kind, and are such court-fools as Shakespeare might have con- ceived himself to be one of, if he had, in Mr. Weller's phrase, " been born in that station of life." Yet these characters are certainly not individualized qualities and passions, for they are eminently natural. If their naturalness does not come from their being por- traits, shghtly varied and heightened, of individuals, in what does their naturalness consist ? In answer to this question, it is first to be said, that SHAKESPEARE. 47 these characters prove that Shakespeare had a concep- tion of human nature, abstracted from all individuals. He not only looked at individuals, and into individuals, but through individuals to their common basis in hu- manity. But he did not rest here. This imaginative analysis, this vital generalization, this glance into the sources of things, evinces, of course, his possession of the profoundest philososophical genius as the foundation of his dramatic genius; but it is not the genius itself, for he also surveyed human nature in action, human na- ture as modified by human life, by manners, customs, institutions, and beliefs, and by that primitive person- ality which separates men, as humanity unites them. These characters, then, are individual natures rooted in human nature. The question then arises, Is their individuality particular or representative ? The least observation shows, we think, that they stand for more than individuals. We are continually saying that this or that person of our acquaintance resembles one of Shakespeare's characters ; we may even learn much about him by studying the character he resembles ; but we never thoroughly identify him with the character; for the character is more powerful, more perfectly de- veloped, acts out the law of his being with more free- dom, than the actual person with whom he is compared. Further than this, — if we are accustomed to classify 48 SHAKESPEARE the persons we know, so as to include many individuals under one type, we shall find that we can include scores of our acquaintances in one of Shakespeare's characters, and then not exhaust its full application. It is not, therefore, his mere variety of characterization, but some- thing peculiar in each of the varieties, which makes him pre-eminently the poet of human nature. Why, for example, is not Charles Dickens as great a novelist as Shakespeare is a dramatist ? Dickens has delineated as wide a variety of persons as Shakespeare, if by vari- ety we mean the absence of repetition. There is no reason but the shortness of life why he should not peo- ple literature with new individuals, until his characters are numbered by the thousand, all in a certain sense original, all discriminated from each other, but few or none representative. The single character of Hamlet represents more individuals than do all the individuals Dickens has delineated. Again, Jane Austen is placed by Macaulay next to Shakespeare for the fehcity, certainty, and nicety of her portraitures of character. The most evanescent lines of distinction between persons who appear alike she seizes with wonderful tact, and indicates these differences with- out the least resort to caricature. If the best character- ization means simply the best portrait-painting, there is no reason why Elizabeth, in " Pride and Prejudice," SHAKESPEARE, 49 Fhould not be placed side by side with Juliet and Cor- delia. But everybody feels that neither Dickens, wiMi his range of observation, nor Jane Austen, with her sub- tilty of observation, makes any approach to Shake- speare. What is the reason ? The reason is, that Shakespeare does not paint indi- viduals, but individualizes classes. In his great nature, the processes of reason and imagination, of philosophic insight and poetic insight, worked harmoniously together. His observation of persons only supplied him with hints for his creations. He did not take up at haphazard this man and that woman, and, because of their oddity or beauty, reproduce them in his story ; but he distm- guished in each actual person the signs of a class na^- ture, midway between his general nature and his indi- vidual peculiarities. He classified men as the naturalist classifies the Animal Kingdom. Agassiz is not confused by the perplexing spectacle of the myriads of animals which form the materials of his science ; for the moment his eye lights upon them, they fall into certain great natural divisions, distinguished by recognized marks of structure. Under each of a few grand divisions he includes innumerable individuals. Now the difference between Agassiz and a naere observer and deacriber of animals is the difference between Shakespeare and 3 D 50 SHAKESPEARE. Dickens, only that Shakespeare works on phenomena more complicated, and presenting more obstacles to classification, than Agassiz deals with. In his deep, wide, and searching observation of man- kind, Shakespeare detects bodies of men who agree in the general tendencies of their characters, who strive after a common ideal of good or evil, and who all fail to reach it. Through these indications and hints he seizes, by his philosophical genius, the law of the class ; by his dramatic genius, he gathers up in one conception the whole multitude of individuals comprehended in the law, and embodies it in a character ; and by his poet- ical genius he lifts this character into an ideal region of life, where all hindrances to the free and full develop- ment of its nature are removed. The character seems all the more natural because it is -perfect of its kind, whereas the actual persons included in the conception are imperfect of their kind. Thus there are many men of the type of Falstaff, but Shakespeare's Falstaff is not an actual Falstaff. Falstaff is the ideal head of the fam- ily, the possibility which they dimly strive to realize, the person they would be if they could. Again, there are many lagoish men, but only one lago, the ideal type of them all ; and by studying him we learn what they would all become if circumstances were propitious, and their loose malignant tendencies were firmly knit to- SHAKESPEARE. 51 gether in positive will and diabolically alert intelligence. And it is the same with the rest of Shakespeare's great creations. The immense domain of human nature they cover is due to the fact, not merely that they are not repetitions of individuals, but that they are not repeti- tions of the same types or classes of individuals. The moment we analyze them, the moment we break them up into their constituent elements, we are amazed at the wealth of wisdom and knowledge which formed the materials of each individual embodiment, and the inexhaustible interest and fulness of meaning and appli- cation revealed in the analytic scrutiny of each. Com- pare, for example, Shakespeare's Timon of Athens — by no means one of Shakespeare's mightiest efforts of characterization — with Lord Byron, both as man and poet, and we shall find that Timon is the highest logical result of the Byronic tendency, and that in him, rather than in Byron, the essential misanthrope is impersonated. The number of poems which Byron wrote does not af- fect the matter at all, because the poems are all expan- sions and variations of one view of life, from which Byron could not escape. Shakespeare, had he pleased, might have filled volumes with Timon's poetic misan- thropy ; but, being a condenser, he was contented with concentrating the idea of the whole class in one grand character, and of putting into his mouth the truest, most 52 SHAKESPEARE. splendid, most terrible things which have ever been uttered from the misanthropic point of view ; and then, victoriously freeing himself from the dreadful mood of mind he had imaginatively realized, he passed on to oc- cupy other and different natures. Shakespeare is su- perior to Byron on Byron's own ground, because Shake- speare grasped misanthropy from its first faint begin- nings in the soul to its firual result on character, — clutched its inmost essence, — discerned it as one out of a hundred subjective conditions of mind, — tried it thoroughly, and found it was too weak and narrow to hold him. Byron was in it, could not escape from it, and never, therefore, thoroughly mastered the philosophy of it. Here, then, in one corner of Shakespeare's mind, we find more than ample space for so great a poet as Byron to house himself But Shakespeare not only in one conception thus in- dividualizes a whole class of men, but he communicates to each character, be it little or colossal, good or evil, that peculiar Shakespearian quality which distinguishes it as his creation. This he does by being and living for the time the person he conceives. What Macaulay says of Bacon is more applicable to Shakespeare, namely, that his mind resembles the tent which the fairy gave to Prince Ahmed. " Fold it, and it seemed a toy fgr th-e hand of a lady. Spread it, and the armies of powerful SHAKESPEARE. 53 sultans might repose beneath its shade." Shakespeare could run his sentiment, passion, reason, imagination, into any mould of personality he was capable of shaping, and think and speak from that. The result is that every character is a denizen of the Shakespearian World ; every character, from Master Slender to Ariel, is in some sense a poet, that is, is gifted with imagination to express his whole nature, and make himself inwardly known ; yet we feel throughout that the " thousand- souled" Shakespeare is still but one soul, capable of shifting into a thousand forms, but leaving its peculiar birth-mark on every individual it informs. Now it is difficult, perhaps impossible, for a critic to reproduce synthetically in his own consciousness, or thoroughly to analyze into all its elements, any single prominent character that Shakespeare has drawn. His characters, however, are not represented apart from each other, but as acting on each other ; and, great as they separately are as conceptions, they are but in- tegral portions of a still mightier conception, which in- cludes the whole drama in which they appear. The value of what we call the inxjidents of such a drama con- sists in their being such incidents as would most nat- urally spring from the mutual action of such persons, or as would best develop their natures. The plot is of small account as disconnected from the characters, but 54 SHAKESPEAEE. of great moment as vitally inwrought with them, and giving coherence to the living organism which results from the combination. It is for this reason that we pay little heed to improbable incidents in the story, provided the incidents serve to bring out the persons. It is very improbable that a bond should have been given payable in a pound of flesh, and still more so that any court in Christendom could have recognized its validity ; but who thinks of this in the Shakespearian society of "The Merchant of Venice " ? Now it is doubtless true that a drama of Shakespeare thus organized, with characters comprehending an im- mense range of human character, and yielding to analy- sis laws of human nature which radiate light into whole departments of human life, produces on our minds, as we read, the effect of unity in variety. We perceive it as a whole, and think therefore we perceive the whole of it. But is it true that we really receive the colossal conception of Shakespeare himself ? Shakespeare, it is plain, can only convey to us what we are capable of taking in ; the mind that perceives reduces greatness to its own mental stature ; and persons, according to their taste, culture, experience, height of intelligence^ capacity of approaching Shakespeare himself, obtaiq different impressions, varying in depth and breadth, of each of his great plays. Who, for instance, has stated SHAKESPEARE. B5 die general conception of the play of " Hamlet " ? The idea of that drama, as given by different critics, is only so much of the idea as could be got into the heads of the critics. Their interpretation at best belongs to the class of Memoires pour servir ; — the rounded whole is described by minds that are angular ; and Shakespeare's conception is measuring them, while they are felicitating themselves that they are measuring it. Even Goethe, the most comprehensive intelligence since Shakespeare, failed to "pluck out the heart" of Hamlet's mystery. Indeed, it is beginning to be con- sidered, that his remarks on the character, thongh deli- cate and profound in themselves, do not touch the es- sential individuality of Hamlet ; that his ingenuity was exercised in the wrong direction ; and that, in his criti- cism, he resembled the sturdy and rapid walker, who checked his pace to ask a boy how far it was to Taun- ton. "If you go on in the way you 're now go- ing," was the reply, " it 's twenty-four thousand miles ; if you turn back, it 's only five." But though some critics since Goethe have not been so elaborately wrong as he, Hamlet is still outside of the largest thought in the right direction. A distinguished thinker has said that there are moods of the mind in which Hamlet ap- pears little, for what he suggests is infinitely more than what he is. This is true as to Shakespeare, but not true 56 SHAKESPEARE. as to other minds ; for until we have grasped the con- ception that Shakespeare has embodied, we have no right to suppose ourselves capable of going beyond it into that vastness of contemplation of which, from Shakespeare's height of vision, the character was an in- adequate expression. Again, it is a common remark, that the school of philosophic critics, especially in their attempts to dive into the meaning of Hamlet, are con- tinually giving Shakespeare the credit of their own thoughts. Giving Shakespeare the credit I Well might he reply, if such were the case, " Beggar that I am, I am even poor in thanks ! " Shakespeare, then, as regards his most gigantic con- ceptions, has probably never been adequately conceived. He must be tried by his peers ; and where are his peers ? We know that he grows in mental stature as our minds enlarge, and as we increase in our knowledge of him ; but he has never been included by criticism as other poets have been included. The greatest and most interpretative minds which have made him their study, though they may have commenced with wielding the' rod, soon found themselves seduced into taking seats on the benches, anxious to learn instead of impatient to teach ; and have been compelled to admit that the poet who is the delight of the rudest urchin in the pit of the playhouse, is also the poet whose works defy the highest faculties of the philosopher thoroughly to comprehend. SHAKESPEAEE. II. XN the last chapter we spoke of Shakespeare's general comprehensiveness and creativeness, of his method of characterization, and of the identity of his genius with his individuality. We purpose now to treat of some particular topics included in the general theme ; and, as criticism on him is like coasting along a continent, we shall make little pretension to system in the order of taking them up. The first of these topics is the succession of Shake- speare's works, considered as steps in the growth and development of his powers, — a subject which has al- ready been ably handled by Mr. Verplanck. The facts, as far as they can be ascertained, are these. Shake- speare went to London about the year 1586, in his twenty-second year, and found some humble employ- ment in one of the theatrical companies. Three years afterwards, in 1589, he had risen to be one of the share- holders of the Blackfriars Theatre. In 1592 he had ac- quired sufficient reputation as a dramatist, or at least as a recaster of the plays of others, to excite the jealousy 3* 58 SHAKESPEAKE. of the leading playwrights, whose crude dramas he condescended to rewrite or retouch. That graceless vagabond, Robert Greene, addressing from his penitent death-bed his old friends Lodge, Peele, and Marlowe, and trying to dissuade them from " spending their wits " any longer in " making plays," spitefully asserts : " There is an upstart crow beautified with our feathers, that, with his tiger's heart wrapped in a player's hide, supposes he is as able to bombast out a blank verse as the best of you ; and, being an absolute Johannes Fac- totum, is, in his own conceit, the only Shake-scene in the country." Doubtless this charge of adopting and adapting the productions of others includes some dramas which have not been preserved, as the company to which Shakespeare was attached owned the manuscripts of a great number of plays which were never printed, and it was a custom, when a play had popular elements in it, for other dramatists to be employed in making such additions as would give continual novelty to the old favorite. But of the plays published in our editions of Shakespeare's writings, it is probable that the Com- edy of Errors, and the three parts of King Henry VI., are only partially his, and should be classed among his adaptations, and not among his early creations. The play of Pericles bears no marks of his mind, ex- cept in some scenes of transcendent power and beauty, SHAKESPEARE. ^ 59 which start up from the rest of the work like towers of gold from a plain of sand ; but these scenes are in his latest manner. In regard to the tragedy of Titus Andronicus, we are so constituted as to resist all the external evidence by which such a shapeless mass of horrors and absurdities is fastened on Shakespeare. Mr. Verplanck thinks it one of Shakespeare's first at- tempts at dramatic composition ; but first attempts must reflect the mental condition of the author at the time they were made ; and we know the mental condition of Shakespeare in his early manhood by his poem of Venus and Adonis, which he expressly styles "the first heir of his invention." Now leaving out of view the fact that Titus Andronicus stamps the impression, not of youthful, but of matured depravity of taste, its execrable enormities of feeling and incident could not have proceeded from the sweet and comely nature in which the poem had its birth. The best criticism on Titus Andronicus was made by Robert Burns, when he was nine years old. His schoolmaster was reading the play aloud in his father's cottage, and when he came to the scene where Lavinia enters with her hands cut ofi" and her tongue cut out, little Robert fell a-crying, and threatened, in case the play was left in the cottage, to burn it. It is hard to believe that what Burns de- spised and detested at the age of nine could have been •60 SHAKESPEAKE. written by Shakespeare at the age of twenty-five. Taking, then, Venus and Adonis as the point of de- parture, we find Shakespeare at the age of twenty-two endowed with all the faculties, but relatively deficient in the passions, of the poet. The poem is a throng of thoughts, fancies, and imaginations, somewhat cramped in the utterance. Coleridge says that " in his poems the creative power and the intellectual energy wrestle as in a war embrace. Each in its excess of strength seems to threaten the extinction of the other. At length in the drama they were reconciled, and fought each with its shield before the breast of the other." Fine as this is, it would perhaps be more exact to say that in his earlier poems his intellect, acting in some degree apart from his sensibility, and playing with its own ingenuities of fancy and meditation, condensed its thoughts in crystals. Afterwards, when his whole na- ture became liquid, he gave us his thoughts in a state of fusion, and his intellect flowed in streams of fire. Take, for example, that passage in the poem where Venus represents the loveliness of Adonis as sending thrills of passion into the earth on which he treads, and as making the bashful moon hide herself from the sight of his bewildering beauty : — " But if thou fall, 0, then imagine this ! The earth, in love with thee, thy footing trips. SHAKESPEARE. 61 And all is but to rob thee of a kiss. Rich preys make true men thieves ; so do thy lips Make modest Dian cloudy and forlorn, Lest she should steal a kiss and die forsworn. " Now of this dark night I perceive the reason: Cynthia for shame obscures her silver shrine, Till forging Nature be condemned of treason, For stealing moulds from heaven that were divine, "Wherein she framed thee, in high heaven's despite. To shame the sun by day and her by night." This is reflected and reflecting passion, or, at least, imagination awakening passion, rather than passion penetrating imagination. Now mark, by contrast, the gush of the heart into the brain, dissolving thought, imagination, and expres- sion, so that they run molten, in the delirious ecstasy of Pericles on recovering his long-lost child : — " Helicanus ! strike me, honour'd sir, Give me a gash, put me to present pain, Lest this great sea of joys, rushing upon me, O'erbear the shores of my mortality, And drown me with their sweetness." If, as is probable, Venus and Adonis was written as early as 1586, we may suppose that the plays which represent the immaturity of his genius, and which are strongly marked with the characteristics of that poem, namely. The Two Gentlemen of Verona, the first draft 62 SHAKESPEARE. of Love's Labor's Lost, and the original Romeo and Juliet, were produced before the year 1592. Following these came King Richard III., King Richard IL, A Midsummer Night's Dream, King John, The Merchant of Venice, and King Henry IV., all of which we know were written before 1598, when Shakespeare was in his thirty-fourth year. During the next eight years he produced King Henry V., The Merry Wives of Wind- sor, As You Like it, Hamlet, Twelfth Night, Measure for Measure, Othello, Macbeth, and King Lear. In this list are the four great tragedies in which his genius culminated. Then came Troilus and Cressida, Timon of Athens, Julius Cjjesar, Antony and Cleopatra, Cym- beline. King Henry VIIL, The Tempest, The Winter's Tale, and Coriolanus. If heed be paid to this order of the plays, it will be seen at once that a quotation from Shakespeare carries with it a very different degree of authority, according as it refers to the youth or the maturity of his mind. Indeed, when we reflect that between the production of The Two Gentlemen of Verona and King Lear there is only a space of fifteen years, we must admit that the history of the human intellect presents no other example of such marvellous progress ; and if we note the giant strides by which it was made, we shall find that they all imply a progressive widening and deepen- SHAKESPEARE. 63 U.^ of soul, a positive growth of the nature of the man, until in Lear the power became supreme and became amazing. Mr. Yerplanck considers the period when he produced his four great tragedies to be the period of his intellectual grandeur, as distinguished from an earlier period which he thinks shows the perfection of his merely poetic and imaginative power ; but the fact would seem to be that his increasing greatness as a phi- losopher was fully matched by his increasing greatness as a poet, and that, in the devouring swiftness of his onward and upward movement, imagination kept abreast of reason. His imagination was never more vivid, all- informing, and creative, — never penetrated with more unerring certainty to the inmost spiritual essence of whatever it touched, — never forced words and rhythm into more supple instruments of thought and feeling, — than when it miracled into form the terror and pity and beauty of Lear. Indeed, the coequal growth of his reason and imagi- nation was owing to the wider scope and increased energy of the great moving forces of his being. It relates primarily to the heart rather than the head. It is the immense fiery force behind his mental powers, kindling them into white heat, and urging them to ef- forts almost preternatural, — it is this which impels the daring thought beyond the limits of positive knowledge. 64 SHAKESPEARE. and prompts the starts of ecstasy in whose unexpected radiance nature and human life are transfigured, and for an instant shine with celestial light. In truth he is, relatively, more intellectual in his early than in his later plays, for in his later plays his intellect is thoroughly impassioned, and though it has really grown in strength and massiveness, it is so fused with imagination and emotion as to be less independently prominento The sources of individuality lie below the intellect; and as Shakespeare went deeper into the soul of man, he more and more represented the brain as the organ and instrument of the heart, as the channel through which sentiment, passion, and character found an intelligible outlet. His own mind was singularly objective ; that is, he saw things as they are in themselves. The minds of his prominent characters are all subjective, and see things as they are modified by the peculiarities of their individual moods and emotions. The very objectivity of his own mind enables him to assume the subjective conditions of less-emancipated natures. Macbeth peoples the innocent air with menacing shapes, projected from his own fiend-haunted imagination ; but the same air is sweet and wholesome to the poet who gave being to Macbeth. The meridian of Shakespeare's power was reached when he created Othello, Macbeth, and Lear, — complex personalities, representing the conflict and SHAKESPEAEE. 65 complication of the mightiest passions in colossal forms of human character, and whose understandings and im- aginations, whose perceptions of nature and human life, and whose weightiest utterances of moral wisdom, are all thoroughly subjective and individualized. The greatness of these characters, as compared with his ear- lier creations, consists in the greater intensity and ampli- tude of their natures, and the wider variety of faculties and passions included in the strict unity of their natures. Richard III., for example, is one of his earlier charac- ters, and, though excellent of its kind, its excellence has been approached by other dramatists, as, for instance, Massinger, in Sir Giles Overreach. But no other dramatist has been able to grasp and represent a char- acter similar in kind to Macbeth, and the reason is that Richard is comparatively a simple conception, while Macbeth is a complex one. There is unity and versa- tility in Richard ; there is unity and variety in Macbeth. Richard is capable of being developed with almost logi- cal accuracy ; for, though there is versatility in the play of his intellect, there is little variety in the motives w^hich direct his intellect. His wickedness is not ex- hibited in the making. He is so completely and glee- fully a villain from the first, that he is not restrained from convenient crime by any scruples or relentings. The vigor of his will is due to his poverty of feeling and 6Q SHAKESPEARE. conscience. He is a brilliant and efficient criminal be- cause he is shorn of the noblest attributes of man. Put, if you could, Macbeth's heart and imagination into him, and his will would be smitten with impotence, and his wit be turned to wailing. The intellect of Macbeth is richer and grander than Richard's, yet Kichard is relatively a more intellectual character ; for the intellect of Macbeth is rooted in his moral nature, and is second- ary in our thoughts to the contending motives and emotions it obeys and reveals. In crime, as in virtue, what a man overcomes should enter into our estimate of the power exhibited in what he does. The question now comes up, — and we suppose it must be met, though we should like to evade it, — How, amid the individualities that Shakespeare has created, are we to detect the individuality of Shakespeare him- self ? In answer it may be said, that, if we survey his dramas in the mass, we find three degrees of unity ; — first, the unity of the individual characters ; second, the unity of the separate plays in which they appear ; and third, the unity of Shakespeare's own nature, — a na- ture which, as it developed, deepened, expanded, and increased in might, but did not essentially change, and which is felt as a potent presence throughout his works, binding them together as the product of one mind. He did not literally go out of himself to inform other na- SHAKESPEAEE. 67 tures, but he included these natures in himself; and, though he does not infuse his individuality into his characters, he does infuse it into the general conceptions which the characters illustrate. His opinions, purposes, theory of life, are to be gathered, not from what his characters say and do, but from the results of what they say and do ; and in each play he so combines and dis- poses the events and persons that the cumulative im- pression expresses his own judgment, indicates his own design, and conveys his own feeling. His individu- ality is so vast, so purified from eccentricity, and we grasp it so imperfectly, that we are apt to deny it alto- gether, and conceive his mind as impersonal. In view of the multiplicity of his creations, and the range of thought, emotion, and character they include, it is a com- mon hyperbole of criticism to designate him as universal. But, in truth, his mind was restricted, in its creative ac- tion, like other minds, within the limits of its personal sympathies, though these sympathies in him were keener, quicker, and more general than in other men of genius. He was a great-hearted, broad-brained person, but still a person, and not what Coleridge calls him, an " omnipresent creativeness." Whatever he could sym- pathize with he could embody and vitally represent ; but his sympathies, though wide, were far from being universal, and, when he was indifferent or hostile, the 68 SHAKESPEARE. dramatist was partially suspended in the satirist and caricaturist, and oversiglit took tlie place of insight. Indeed, his limitations are more easily indicated than his enlargements. We know what he has not done more surely than we know what he has done ; for if we attempt to follow his genius in any of the numerous lines of direction along which it sweeps with such vic- torious ease, we soon come to the end of our tether, and are confused with a throng of thoughts and imagina- tions, which, as Emerson exquisitely says, " sweetly torment us with invitations to their own inaccessible homes." But there were some directions which his genius did not take, — not so much from lack of mental power as from lack of disposition or from positive an- tipathy. Let us consider some of these. And iSrst, Shakespeare's religious instincts and senti- ments were comparatively weak, for they were not crea- tive. He has exercised his genius in the creation of no character in which religious sentiment or religious pas- sion is dominant. He could not, of course, — he, the poet of feudalism, — overlook religion as an element of the social organization of Europe, but he did not seize Christian ideas in their essence, or look at the human soul in its direct relations with God. And just think of the field of humanity closed to him ! For sixteen hun- dred years, remarkable men and women had appeared, SHAKESPEARE. 69 representing all classes of religious character, from the ecstasy of the saint to the gloom of the fanatic ; yet his intellectual curiosity was not enough excited to explore and reproduce their experience. Do you say that the subject was foreign to the purpose of an Elizabethan playwright ? The answer is, that Dekkar and Massin- ger attempted it, for a popular audience, in " The Virgin Martyr " ; and though the tragedy of " The Virgin Mar- tyr " is a huddled mass of beauties and deformities, its materials of incident and characters, could Shakespeare have been attracted to them, might have been organized into as great a drama as Othello. Again, Marlowe, in his play of " Doctor Faustus," has imperfectly treated a subject which in Shakespeare's hands would have been made into a tragedy sublimer than Lear, could he have thrown himself into it with equal earnestness. Mar- lowe, from the fact tloat he was a brawling atheist, had evidently at some time directed his whole heart and imagination to the consideration of religious questions, and had resolutely faced facts from which Shakespeare turned away. Shakespeare, also, in common with th^ other dram- atists of the time., looked at the Puritans as objects of satire, laughing at them instead of gazing into them. They were doubtless grotesque enough in external ap- pearance ; but the poet of human nature should have 70 SHAKESPEARE. penetrated through the appearance to the substance, and recognized in them, not merely the possibility of Crom- well, but of the ideal of character which Cromwell but imperfectly represented. You may say that Shake- speare's nature was too sunny and genial to admit the Puritan. It was not too sunny or genial to admit Rich- ards, and lagos, and Gonerils, and " secret, black, and midnight hags." It may be doubted also if Shakespeare's affinities ex- tended to those numerous classes of human character that stand for the reforming and philanthropic senti- ments of humanity. We doubt if he was hopeful for the race. He was too profoundly impressed with its disturbing passions to have faith in its continuous pro- gress. Though immensely greater than Bacon, it may be questioned if he could thoroughly have appreciated Bacon's intellectual character. He could have deline- ated him to perfection in everything but in that peculiar philanthropy of the mind, that spiritual benignity, that belief in man and confidence in his future, which both atone and account for so many of Bacon's moral defects. There is no character in his plays that covers the ele- ments of such a man as Hildebrand of Luther, or either of the two Williams of Orange, or Hampden, or How- ard, or Clarkson, or scores of other representative men whom history celebrates. Though the broadest individ- SHAKESPEARi 71 ual nature which human nature has produced, human nature is immensely broader than he. It would be easy to quote passages from Shake- speare's works which would seem to indicate that hi? genius was not limited in any of the directions which have been pointed out ; but these passages are thoughts and observations, not men and women. Hamlet's soliloquy, and Portia's address to Shylock, might be ad- duced as proofs that he comprehended the religious ele- ment ; but then who would take Hamlet or Portia as representative of the religious character in any of its numerous historical forms ? There is a remark in one of his plays to this effect : — " It is an heretic that makes the fire, Not she which burns in 't." This might be taken as a beautiful expression of Chris- tian toleration, and is certainly admirable as a general thought ; but it indicates Shakespeare's indifference to religious passions in indicating his superiority to them. It would have been a much greater achievement of genius to have passed into the mind and heart of the conscientious burner of heretics, seized the essence of the bigot's character, and embodied in one great ideal individual a class of men whom we now both execrate and misconceive. If he coiJd follow the dramatic pro- cess of his genius for Sir Toby Welch, why could he not do it for St. Dominic ? 72 SHAKESPEARE. Indeed, toleration, in the sense that Shakespeare has given to the word, is not expressed in maxims directed against intolerance, but in the exercise of charity towards intolerant men ; and it is thus necessary to indicate the limitations of his sympathy with his race, in order to ap- preciate its real quality and extent. His unapproached greatness consists, not in including human nature, but in taking the point of view of those large classes of hu- man nature he did include. His sympathetic insight was both serious and humorous ; and he thus equally escaped the intolerance of taste and the intolerance of intelligence. What we would call the worst criminals and the most stupid fools were, as mirrored in his mind, fairly dealt with ; every opportunity was afforded them to justify their right to exist ; their words, thoughts, and acts were viewed in relation to their circumstances and character, so that he made them inwardly known, as well as outwardly perceived. The wonder of all this would be increased, if we supposed, for the sake of illus- tration, that the persons and events of all Shakespeare's plays were historical, and that, instead of being repre- sented by Shakespeare, they were criticised by Macau- lay. The result would be that the impression received from the historian of every incident and every person would be different, and would be wrong. The external facts might not be altered ; but the falsehood would pro- SHAKESPEAKE. 73 ceed from the incapacity or indisposition of the historian to pierce to the heart of the facts by sympathy and imagination. There would be abundant information, abundant eloquence, abundant invective against crime, abundant scorn of stupidity and folly, perhaps much sagacious reflection and judicial scrutiny of evidence ; but the inward and essential truth would be wanting. What external statement of the acts and probable mo- tives of Macbeth and Othello could convey the idea we have of them from being witnesses of the conflict of their thoughts and passions ? How wicked and shallow and feeble and foolish would Hamlet appear, if repre- sented, not in the light of Shake^eare's imagination, but in the hght of Macaulay's epigrams ! How the his- torian would display the dazzling fen^e of his rhetoric on the indecision of the prince, his brutality to Ophelia, his cowardice, his impotence between contending mo- tives, and the chaos of blunders and crimes in which he sinks from view ! The subject would be even a better one for him than that of James the Second ; yet the very supposition of such a mode of treatment makes us feel the pathos of the real Hamlet's injunction to the friend who strives to be his companion in death : — " Absent t-bee from felicity awhile, And in this harsh world draw thy breath in pain, To tell my story. '^ 4 74 SHAKESPEARE. If the historian would thus deal with the heroes, such " small deer " as Bardolph and Master Slender would of course be puffed out of existence with one hiss of lordly contempt. Yet Macaulay has a more vivid historical imagination, more power of placing himself in the age about which he writes, than historians like Hume and Hallam, whose judgments of men are sum- maries of qualities, and imply no inwardness of vision, no discerning of spirits. In the whole class, the point of view is the historian's, and not the point of view of the persons the historian describes. The curse which clings to celebrity is, that it commonly enters history only to be puffed or lampooned. The truth is, that most men, the intelligent and the virtuous as well as the ignorant and the vicious, are in- tolerant of other individualities. They are uncharitable by defect of sympathy and defect of insight. Society, even the best, is apt to be made up of people who are engaged in the agreeable occupation of despising each other; for one association for mutual admiration there are twenty for mutual contempt ; yet while conversation is thus mostly made up of strictures on individuals, it rarely evinces any just perception of individualities. James is indignant or jocose at the absence of James in John, and John is horror-stricken at the impudence of James in refusing to be John. Each person feels himself SHAKESPEARE. 75 to be misunderstood, though he never questions his power to understand his neighbor. Egotism, vanity, prejudice, pride of opinion, conceit of excellence, a mean delight in recognizing inferiority in others, a meaner delight in re- fusing to recognize the superiority of others, all the hon- est and all the base forms of self-assertion, cloud and distort the vision when one mind directs its glance at another. For one person who is mentally conscientious there are thousands who are morally honest. The re- sult is a vast massacre of character, which would move the observer's compassion were it not that the victims are also the culprits, and that pity at the spectacle of the arrow quivering in the sufferer's breast is checked by the sight of the bow bent in the sufferer's hands. This depreciation of others is the most approved method of exalting ourselves. It educates us in self-esteem, if not in knowledge. The savage conceives that the power of the enemy he kills is added to his own. Shakespeare more justly conceived that the power of the human being with whom he sympathized was added to his own. This toleration, without which an internal knowledge of other natures is impossible, Shakespeare possessed beyond any other man recorded in literature or history. It is a moral as well as mental trait, and belongs to the highest class of virtues. It is a virtue which, if gener- 76 SHAKESPEARE. ally exercised, would remove mutual hostility by en- lightening mutual ignorance. And in Shakespeare we have, for once, a man great enough to be modest and charitable ; who has the giant's power, but, far from using it like a giant, trampling on weaker creatures, prefers to feel them in his arms rather than feel them under his feet ; and whose toleration of others is the exercise of humility, veracity, beneficence, and justice, as well as the exercise of reason, imagination, and hu- mor. "We shall never appreciate Shakespeare's genius until we recognize in him the exercise of the most difficult virtues, as well as the exercise of the most wide-reaching intelligence. It is, of course, not so wonderful that he should take the point of view of characters in themselves beautiful and noble, though even these might appear very differ- ent under the glance of a less soul-searching eye. For such aspects of life, however, all genius has a natural affinity. But the- marvel of his comprehensiveness is his mode of dealing with the vulgar, the vicious, and the low, — with persons who are commonly spurned as dolts and knaves. His serene benevolence did not pause at what are called " deserving objects of charity," but extended to the undeserving, who are, in truth, the proper objects of charity. If we compare him, in this respect, with poets like Dante and Milton, in whom SHAKESPEARE. 77 elevation is the predominant characteristic, we shall find that they tolerate humanity only in its exceptional ex- amples of beauty and might. They are aristocrats of intellect and conscience, — the noblest aristocracy, but also the haughtiest and most exclusive. They can sym- pathize with great energies, whether celestial or diabolic, but their attitude towards the feeble and the low is apt to be that of indifference or contempt. Milton can do justice to the Devil, though not, like Shakespeare, to " poor devils." But it may be doubted if the wise and good have the right to cut the Providential bond which connects them with the foolish and the bad, and set up an aristocratic humanity of their own, ten times more supercilious than the aristocracy of blood. Divorce the loftiest qualities from humility and geniality, and they quickly contract a pharisaic taint ; and if there is any- thing which makes the wretched more wretched, it is the insolent condescension of patronizing benevolence, — if there is anything which makes the vicious more vicious, it is the " I-am-better-than-thou " expression on the face of conscious virtue. Now Shakespeare had none of this pride of superiority, either in its noble or ignoble form. Consider that, if his gigantic powers had been directed by antipathies instead of sympathies, he would have left few classes of human character un- touched by his terrible scorn. Even if his antipathies 78 SHAKESPEAEE. had been those of taste and morals, he would have done so much to make men hate and misunderstand each other, — so much to destroy the very sentiment of hu- manity, — that he would have earned the distinction of being the greatest satirist and the worst man that ever lived. But instead, how humanely he clings to the most unpromising forms of human nature, insists on their right to speak for themselves as much as if they were passionate Romeos and high-aspiring Bucking- hams, and does for them what he might have desired should be done for himself had he been Dogberry, or Bottom, or Abhorson, or Bardolph, or any of the rest ! The low characters, the clowns and vagabonds, of Ben Jonson's plays, excite only contempt or disgust. Shake- speare takes the same materials as Ben, passes them through the medium of his imaginative humor, and changes them into subjects of the most soul-enriching mirth. Their actual prototypes would not be tolerated ; but when his genius shines on them, they " lie in light " before our humorous vision. It must be admitted that in his explorations of the lower levels of human nature he sometimes touches the mud deposits ; still, he never hisses or jeers at the poor relations through Adam he there discovers, but magnanimously gives them the wink of consanguinity. This is one extreme of his genius, — the poetic com- SHAKESPEARE. 79 prehension and embodiment of the low. What was the other extreme ? How high did lie mount in the ideal region, and what class of his characters represents his loftiest flight ? It is commonly asserted that his super- natural beings, — his ghosts, spectres, witches, fairies, and the like, — exhibiting his command of the dark side and the bright' side, the terror and the grace, of the super- natural world, indicate his rarest quality ; for in these, it is said, he went out of human nature itself, and created beings that never existed. Wonderful as these are, we must recollect that in them he worked on a basis of popular superstitions, on a mythology as definite as that of Greece and Rome, and though he recreated instead of copying his materials, though he Shakespear- ianized them, he followed the same process of his genius in delineating Hecate and Titania as in deline- ating Dame Quickly and Anne Page. All his charac- ters, from the rogue Autolycus to the heavenly Cordelia, are in a certain sense ideal ; but the question now re- lates to the rarity of the elements, and the height of the mood, and not merely to the action of his mind ; and we think that the characters technically called super- natural which appear in his works are much nearer the earth than others which, though they lack the name, have more of the spiritual quality of the thing. The highest form of the supernatural is to be found in the purest, highest, most beautiful souls. 80 SHAKESPEAEE. Did it never strike you, in reading The Tempest, that Ariel is not so supernatural as Miranda ? We may be sure that Ferdinand so thought, in that rapture of wonder when her soul first shone on him through her innocent eyes ; and afterwards, when he asks, " I do beseech you (Chiefly that I might set it in my prayers )- "What is your name ? " And doubtless there was a more marvellous melody in her voice than in the mysterious magical music " That crept by him upon the waters, Allayhig both their fury and his passion With its sweet air." Shakespeare, indeed, in his transcendently beautiful embodiments of feminine excellence, the most exquisite creations in literature, passed into a region of sentiment and thought, of ideals and of ideas, altogether higher and more supernatural than that region in which he shaped his delicate Ariels and his fairy Titanias. The question has been raised whether sex extends to soul. However this may be decided, here is a soul, with its records in literature, who is at once the manliest of men, and the most womanly of women ; who can not only recognize the feminine element in existing individuals, but discern the idea, the pattern, the radiant genius, o^ SHAKESPEARE 81 womanhood itself, as it hovers, unseen by other eyes, over the living representatives of the sex. Literature boasts many eminent female poets and novelists ; but not one has ever approached Shakespeare in the purity, the sweetness, the refinement, the elevation, of his per- ceptions of feminine character, — much less approached him in the power of embodying these perceptions in per- sons. These characters are so thoroughly domesticated on the earth, that we are tempted to forget the heaven of invention from which he brought them. The most beautiful of spirits, they are the most tender of daugh- ters, lovers, and wives. They are " airy shapes," but they " syllable men's names." Rosalind, Juliet, Ophe- lia, Viola, Perdita, Miranda, Desdemona, Hermione, Portia, Isabella, Imogen, Cordelia, — if their names do not call up their natures, the most elaborate analysis of criticism will be of no avail. Do you say that these women are slightly idealized portraits of actual women ? Was Cordelia, for example, simply a good, affectionate daughter of a foolish old king ? To Shakespeare him- self she evidently " partook of divineness " ; and he hints of the still ecstasy of contemplation in which her nature first rose upon his imagination, when, speaking through the lips of a witness of her tears, he hallows them as they fall : — " She shook The holy water from her heavenly eyes." 4 * I" 82 SHAKESPEARE. And these Shakespearian women, though all radia- tions from one great ideal of womanhood, are at the same time intensely individualized. Each has a separate soul, and the processes of intellect as well as emotion are different in each. Each, for example, is endowed with the faculty, and is steeped in the atmosphere, of imagi- nation ; but who could mistake the imagination of Ophelia for the imagination of Imogen ? — the loitering, lingering movement of the one, softly consecrating whatever it touches, for the irradiating, smiting efficiency, the flash and the bolt, of the other ? Imogen is perhaps the most completely expressed of Shakespeare's women ; for^ in her, every faculty and affection is fused with imagination, and the most exquisite tenderness is com- bined with vigor and velocity of nature. Her mind darts in an instant to the ultimate of everything. After she has parted with her husband, she does not merely say that she will pray for him. Her affection is winged, and in a moment she is enskied. She does not look up, she goes up : she would have charged him, she says, " At the sixth, hour of morn, at noon, at midnight; . T' encounter me with orisons, for then / am in heaven for him.'''' When she hears of her husband's inconstancy, the possi- ble object of his sensual whim is at once consumed in the fire that leaps from her impassioned lips : — SHAKESPEAEE. 83 " Some jay of Italy, Whose mother is her painting, hath betrayed him." Mr. Collier, ludicrously misconceiving the instinctive ac- tion of Imogen's mind, thinks the true reading is, " who smothers her with painting." Now Imogen's wrath first reduces the light woman to the most contemptible of birds and the most infamous of symbols, the jay, and then, not willing to leave her any substance at all, anni- hilates her very being with the swift thought that the paint on her cheeks is her mother, — that she is nothing but the mere creation of painting, a phantom born of a color, without real body or soul. It would be easy to show that the mental processes of all Shakespeare's women are as individual as their dispositions. And now think of the amplitude of this man's soul ! Within the immense space which stretches between Dog- berry or Launcelot Gobbo and Imogen or Cordelia, lies the Shakespearian world. No other man ever ex- hibited such philosophic comprehensiveness ; but philo- sophic comprehensiveness is often displayed apart from creative comprehensiveness, and along the whole vast line of facts, laws, analogies, and relations over which Shakespeare's intellect extended, his perceptions were vital, his insight was creative, his thoughts flowed in forms. And now, was he proud of his transcendent supe- riorities ? Did he think that he had exhausted all that 84 SHAKESPEAKE. can appear before the sight of the eye and the sight of the soul ? No. The immeasurable opulence of the undis- covered and undiscerned regions of existence was never felt with more reverent humility than by this discoverer, who had seen in rapturous visions so many new worlds open on his view. In the play which perhaps best ex- hibits the ecstatic action of his mind, and which is alive in every part with that fiery sense of unlimited power which the mood of ecstasy gives, — in the play of An- tony and Cleopatra, — he has put into the mouth of the Soothsayer what seems to have been his own modest judgment of the extent of his glance into the uni=> verse of matter and mind : — "In nature's infinite book of secrecy A little I can read ! " be:n" jonson". A UTHORS are apt to be popularly considered as •^-*- physically a feeble folk, — as timid, nervous, dys- peptic rhymers or prosers, unfitted to grapple with the rough realities of life. We shall endeavor here to pre- sent the image of one calculated to reverse this impres- sion, — the image of a stalwart man of letters, who lived two centuries and a half ago, in the greatest age of English literature, who undeniably had brawny fists as well as forgetive faculties, who could handle a club as readily as a pen, hit his mark with a bullet as surely as with a word, and — a sort of cross be- tween the bully and the bard — could shoulder his way through a crowd of prize-fighters to take his seat among the tuneful company of immortal poets. This man, Ben Jonson, commonly stands next to Shakespeare in a consideration of the dramatic literature of the age of Elizabeth ; and certainly, if the " thousand-souled " Shakespeare may be said to represent mankind, Ben as unmistakably stands for English-kind. He is " Saxon " England in epitome, — John Bull passing from a name into a man, — a proud, strong, tough, solid, domineer- 86 BEN JONSON. ing individual, whose intellect and personality cannot be severed, even in thought, from his body and personal appearance. Ben's mind, indeed, was rooted in Ben's character ; and his character took symbolic form in his physical frame. He seemed built up, mentally as well as bodily, out of beef and sack, mutton and Canary ; or, to say the least, was a joint product of the English mind and the English larder, of the fat as well as the thought of the land, of the soil as well as the soul of England. The moment we attempt to estimate his eminence as a dram- atist, he disturbs the equanimity of our judgment by tum- bling head-foremost into the imagination as a big, bluff, burly, and quarrelsome man, with " a mountain belly and a rocky face." He is a very pleasant boon companion as long as we make our idea of his importance agree with his own ; but the instant we attempt to dissect his intellectual pretensions, the living animal becomes a dangerous subject, — his countenance flames, his great hands double up, his thick lips begin to twitch with im- pending invective, and, while the critic's impression of him is thus all the more vivid, he is checked in its ex- pression by a very natural fear of the consequences. There is no safety but in taking this rowdy leviathan of letters at his own valuation ; and the relation of critics towards him is as perilous as that of the jurymen to- wards the Irish advocate, who had an unpleasant habit BEN JONSON. 87 of sending them the challenge of the duellist whenever they brought in a verdict against any of his clients. There is, in fact, such a vast animal force in old Ben's self-assertion, that he bullies posterity as he bullied his contemporaries ; and, while we admit his claim to rank next to Shakespeare among the dramatists of his age, we beg our readers to understand that we do it under intimidation. The qualities of this bold, racy, and brawny egotist can be best conveyed in a biographical form. He was born in 1574, the grandson of a gentleman who, for his religion, lost his estate, and for a time his liberty, in Queen Mary's reign, and the son of a clergyman in hum- ble circumstances, who died about a month before his " rare " offspring was born. His mother, shortly after the death of her husband, married a master-bricklayer. Ben, who as a boy doubtless exhibited brightness of in- tellect and audacity of spirit, seems to have attracted the attention of Camden, who placed him in Westminster School, of which he was master. Ben there displayed so warm a love of learning, and so much capacity in rapidly acquiring it, that at the age of sixteen he is said to have been removed to the University of Cam- bridge, though he stated to Drummond, long after- wards, that he was "master of arts in both the Uni- versities, by their favor, not his studie." His ambition 88 BEN JONSON. at this time, if we may believe some of his biographers, was to be a clergyman ; and had it been gratified, he would probably have blustered his way to a bishopric, and proved himself one of the most arrogant, learned, and pugnacious disputants of the English Church Mili- tant, — perhaps have furnished the type of that pecu- liar religionist, compounded of bully, pedant, and bigot, whom Warburton was afterwards, from the lack of models, compelled to originate. But after residing a few months at the University, Ben, deserted by his friends and destitute of money, found it impossible to carry out his design ; and he returned disappointed to his mother's house. As she could not support him in idleness, the stout-hearted student adopted the most obvious means of earning his daily bread, and for a short time followed the occupation of his father-in-law, going to the work of bricklaying, according to the tradition, with a trowel in one hand, but with a Horace in the other. His enemies among the dramatists did not forget this when he be- came famous, but meanly sneered at him as "the lime-and-mortar poet." "When we reflect that in the aristocratic age of good Queen Bess, play-writing, even the writing of Hamlets and Alchy mists, was, if we may trust Dr. Farmer, hardly considered " a creditable em- ploy," we may form some judgment of the position of the working classes, when a mechanic was thus deemed BEN JONSON. 89 to have no rights which a playwright " was bound to respect." We have no means of deciding whether or not Ben was foolish enough to look upon his trade as degrading ; that it was distasteful we know from the fact that he soon exchanged the trowel for the sword ; and we hear no more of his dealing with bricks, if we may except his questionable habit of sometimes carrying too many of them in his hat. At the age of eighteen he ran away to the Continent, and enlisted as a volunteer in the English army in Flanders, fully intending, doubt- less, as fate seemed against his being a Homer or an Aristotle, to try if fortune would not make him an Alexander or a Hannibal. As ill-luck would have it, however, his abundant vitality had little scope in mar- tial exercise. He does not appear to have been in any general engagement, though he signalized his personal prowess in a manner which he was determined should not be forgotten through any diffidence of his own. Boastful as he was brave, he was never weary of brag- ging how he had encountered one of the enemy, fought with him in presence of both armies, killed him, and tri- umphantly " taken opima spoUa from him." After serving one campaign, our Ajax-Thersites re- turned, at the age of nineteen, to England, bringing with him, according to Gifford, " the reputation of a brave 90 BEN JONSON. man, a smattering of Dutch, and an empty purse." To these efficiencies and deficiencies he probably added the infirmity of drinking ; for, as " our army in Flanders " ever drank terribly as well as " swore terribly," it may be supposed that Ben there laid, deep and wide, the foundation of his bacchanalian habits. Arrived in London, and thrown on his own resources for support, he turned naturally to the stage, and became an actor in a minor playhouse, called the Green Curtain. Though he was through life a good reader, and though at this time he was not afflicted with the scurvy, which eventually so punched his face as to make one of his satirists compare it, with witty malice, to the cover of a warming-pan, he still never rose to any eminence as an actor. He had not been long at the Green Curtain when a quarrel with one of his fellow-performers led to a duel, in which Jon- son killed his antagonist, was arrested on a charge of murder, and, in his own phrase, was brought " almost at the gallowes," — an unpleasant proximity, which he hastened to increase by relieving the weariness of im- prisonment in discussions on religion with a Popish priest, also a prisoner, and by becoming a convert to Romanism. As the zealous professors of the old faith had passed, in Elizabeth's time, from persecutors into martyrs, Ben, the descendant of one of Queen Mary's BEN JONSON. 91 victims, evinced more than his usual worldly prudence in seizing this occasion to join their company, as he could reasonably hope that, if he escaped hanging on the charge of homicide, he still might contrive to be beheaded and disembowelled on a charge of treason. In regard, however, to the original cause of his impris- onment, it would seem that, on investigation, it was found the duel had been forced upon him, that his an- tagonist had taken the precaution of bringing into the field a sword ten inches longer than his own, and thus, far from expecting to be the victim of murder, had not unsagaciously counted on committing it. Jonson was released ; but, apparently vexed at this propitious turn of his fortunes, instead of casting about for some means of subsistence, he almost immediately married a woman as poor as himself, — a wife whom he afterwards curtly described as " a shrew, yet honest." A shrew, indeed ! As if Mrs. Jonson must not often have had just occasion to use her tongue tartly ! — as if her redoubtable Ben did not often need its acrid admonitions ! They seem to have lived together until 1613, when they separated. Absolute necessity drove Jonson again to the stage, probably both as actor and writer. He began his dra- matic career, as Shakespeare had begun his, by doing job-work for the managers, — that is, by altering, recast- ing, and making additions to, old plays. At last, in 92 BEN JONSON. 1596, in his twenty-second year, he placed himself at a bound among the famous dramatists of the time, by the production, at the Rose Theatre, of his comedy of Ev- ery Man in his Humor. Two years afterwards, having in the mean time been altered and improved, it was, through the influence of Shakespeare, accepted by the players of the Blackfriars Theatre, Shakespeare him- self acting the characterless part of the Elder Knowell. Among the writers of the Elizabethan age, — an age in which, for a wonder, there seemed to be a glut of genius, — Ben is prominent more for racy originality of personal character, weight of understanding, and quick- ness of fancy, than for creativeness of imagination. His first play. Every Man in his Humor, indicates, to a great extent, the quality and the kind of power with which he was endowed. His prominent characteristic was will, — will carried to self-will, and sometimes to self-exaggeration almost furious. His understanding was solid, strong, penetrating, even broad, and it was well furnished with matter derived both from experience and books ; but, dominated by a personality so fretful and fierce, it was impelled to look at men and things, not in their relations to each other, but in their relations to Ben. He had reached that ideal of stormy conceit in which, according to Emerson, the egotist declares, ^ Difference from me is the measure of absurdity." BEN JONSON. 93 Even the imaginary characters he delineated as a dram- atist were all bound, as by tough cords, to the will that gave them being, lacked that joyous freedom and care- less grace of movement which rightfully belonged to them as denizens of an ideal world, and had to obey their master Ben, as puppets obey the showman. His power of external observation was pitilessly keen and searching, and it was accompanied by a rich, though somewhat coarse and insolent vein of humor; but his egotism commonly directed his observation to what was below, rather than above himself, and gave to his humor a scornful, rather than a genial tone. He huffs even in his hilarity ; his fun is never infectious ; and his very laughter is an assertion of superior wisdom. He has none of that humanizing humor, which, in Shakespeare, makes us like the vagabonds we laugh at, and which insures for Dogberry and Nick Bottom, Autolychus and Falstaff, warmer friends among readers than many great historic dignities of the state and the camp can command. In regard to the materials of the dramatist, Jonson, in his vagrant career, had seen human nature under many aspects; but he had surveyed it neither with the eye of reason nor the eye of imagination. His mind fastened on the hard actualities of observation, without passing to what they implied or suggested. Deficient, thus, in philosophic insight and poetic insight, his shrewd. 94 BEN JONSON. contemptuous glance rarely penetrated beneath the man- ners and eccentricities of men. His attention was arrested, not by character, but by prominent peculiarities of character, — peculiarities which almost transformed character into caricature. To use his own phrase, he delineated *' humors " rather than persons, that is, indi- viduals under the influence of some dominant aflPectation, or whim, or conceit, or passion, that drew into itself, colored, and mastered the whole nature, — " an acorn," as Sir Thomas Browne phrases it, "in their young brows, which grew to an oak in their old heads." He thus inverts the true process of characterization. In- stead of seeing the trait as an offshoot of the. individual, he individualizes the trait. Every man is in his humor, instead of every humor being in its man. In order that there should be no misconception of his purpose, he named his chief characters after their predominant qualities, as Morose, Surly, Sir Amorous La Fool, Sir Politic Would Be, Sir Epicure Mammon, and the like ; and, apprehensive even then that his whole precious meaning would not be taken in, he appended to his dramatis personcB further explanations of their respective natures. This distrust of the power of language to lodge a notion in another brain is especially English ; but Ben, of all writers, seems to have been most impressed with BEN JONSON. 95 the necessity of pounding an idea into the perceptions of his countrymen. His mode resembles ^he attempt of that honest Briton who thus delivered his judgment on the French nation : " I hate a Frenchman, sir. Every Frenchman is either a puppy or a rascal, sir." And Ihen, fearful that he had not been sufficiently explicit, he added, " Do you take my idea ? " With all abatements, however, the comedy of Every Man in his Humor is a remarkable effort, considered as the production of a young man of twenty-two. The two most striking characters are Kitely and Captain Bobadil. Give Jonson, indeed, a peculiarity to start with, and he worked it out with logical exactness. So intense was his conception of it, that he clothed it in flesh and blood, gave it a substantial existence, and sometimes succeeded in forcing it into literature as a permanent character. Bobadil, especially, is one of Ben's masterpieces. He is the most colossal coward and braggart of the comic stage. He can sv»^ear by nothing less terrible than " by the body of Csesar," or " by the foot of Pha- raoh," when his oath is not something more terrific still, namely, " by my valor " ! Every school-boy knows the celebrated passage in which the boasting Captain offers to settle the affairs of Europe by associating with himself twenty other Bobadils, as "cunning i' the fence " as him- 96 BEN JONSON. self, and challenging an army of forty thousand men, twenty at a time, and killing the whole in a certain number of days. Leaving out the cowardice, we may say there was something of Bobadil in Jonson him- self; and it may be shrewdly suspected that his con- ceit of destroying an army in this fashion came into his head in the exultation of feeling which followed his own successful exploit, in the presence of both armies, when he was a soldier in Flanders. Old John Dennis de- scribed genius " as a furious joy and pride of soul at the conception of an extraordinary hint." Ben had this " furious joy and pride," not only in the conception of extraordinary hints, but in the doing of extraordinary things. Jonson followed up his success by producing the plays of Every Man out of his Humor and Cynthia's Revels, — dramatic satires on the manners, folHes, affec- tations, and vices, of the city and the court. One good result of Jonson's egotism was, that it made him afraid of nothing. He openly appeared among the dramatists of his day as a reformer, and, poor as he was, refused 10 pander to popular tastes, whether those tastes took the direction of ribaldry, or blasphemy, or bombast. He had courage, morality, earnestness ; but then his cour- age was so blustering,, his morality so irascible, and his devotion to his own ideas of art so exclusive, that he BEN JONSON. 97 was constantly defying and insulting the persons he pro- posed to teach. Other dramatists said to the audience, " Please to applaud this " ; but Ben said, " Now, you fools, we shall see if you have sense enough to applaud this ! " The stage, to be sure, was to be exalted and improved, but it was to be done by his own works, and the glory of literature w^as to be associated with the glory of Master Benjamin. This conceit, by making him insensible to Shakespeare's influence, made him, next to Shakespeare, perhaps the most original dram- atist of the time. He differed from his brother dram- atists not in degree, but in kind. He felt it was not for him to imitate, but to produce models for imitation, — not for him to catch the spirit of the age, but to originate a better. In short, he felt and taught belief in Ben ; and, high as posterity rates the literature of the age of Eliza- beth, it would be supposed from his prologues and epi- logues that he conceived his fat body to have fallen on evil days. In every Man out of his Humor and Cynthia's Revels, he is in a raging passion throughout. His verse groans with the weight of his wrath. " My soul," he exclaims, " Was never ground into such oily colors To flatter vice and daub iniquity. But with an arm^d and resolved hand I '11 strip the ragged follies of the time Naked as at their birth, 98 BEjn jonson. and with a -whip of steel Print wounding lashes on their iron ribs." But though he exhausts the whole rhetoric of railing, in- vective, contempt, and scorn, we yet find it difficult to feel any of the indignation he labors to excite. Admiration, however, cannot be refused to Jonson's prose style in these as in his other plays. It is terse, sharp, swift, biting, — every word a die that stamps a definite image. Occasionally the author's veins, to use his own apt expression, seem to " run quicksilver," and " every phrase comes forth steeped in the very brine of conceit, and sparkles like salt in fire." Yet, though we have scenes in which there is brightness in every sentence, the result of the whole is something like dulness, as the object of the whole is to exalt himself and de- press others. But in these plays, in strange contrast with their general character, we have a few specimens of that sweetness of sentiment, refinement of fancy, and indefinite beauty of imagination, which, occupying some secluded corner of his large brain, seemed to exist apart from his ordinary powers and passions. Among these, the most exquisite is this Hymn to Diana, which partakes of the serenity of the moonlight, whose goddess it invokes ; — " Queen and huntress chaste and fair, Now the sun is laid to sleep, Seated in thy silver chair, BEN JONSON. 99 State in wonted manner keep. Hesperus entreats thy light, Goddess excellently bright ! " Earth, let not thy envious shade Dare itself to interpose ; Cynthia's shining orb was made Heaven to clear when day did close. Bless us, then, with wishdd sight, Goddess excellently bright. " Lay thy bow of pearl apart And thy crystal-gleaming quiver; Give unto the flying hart Space to breathe how short soever, — Thou that mak'st a day of night. Goddess excellently bright." If, as Jonson's adversaries maliciously asserted, " every line of his poetry cost him a cup of sack/' we must, even in our more temperate days, pardon him the eighteen cups which, in this melodious lyric, went into his mouth as sack, but, by some precious chemistry, came out through his pen as pearls. It was inevitable that the imperious attitude Jonson assumed, and the insolent pungency of his satire, should rouse the wrath of the classes he lampooned and the enmity of the poets he ridiculed and decried. Among those who conceived themselves assailed, or who felt insulted by his arrogant tone, were two dramatists. 100 BEN JONSON. Thomas Dekkar and John Marston. They soon re' criminated ; and, as Ben was better fitted by nature to dispense than to endure scorn and derision, he, in 1601, produced The Poetaster, the object of which was to silence forever, not only Dekkar and Marston, but all other impudent doubters of his infallibility. The humor of the thing is, that, in this elaborate attempt to convict his adversaries of calumny in taxing him with self-love and arrogance, he ostentatiously exhibits the very quali- ties he disclaims. He keeps no terms with those who profess disbelief in Ben. They are " play-dressers and plagiaries," " fools or jerking pedants," " buffoon barking wits," tickling "base vulgar ears with beggarly and barren trash," while his are " The high raptures of a happy Muse, Borne on the wings of her immortal thought, That kicks at earth with a disdainful heel, And beats at heaven's gate with her bright hoofs." Dekkar retorted in a play called Satiromastrix ; or, the Untrussing of the Humorous Poet ; but, though the scur- rility is brilliantly bitter, it is less efficient and "hearted " than Jonson's. This literary controversy, conducted in acted plays, had to the public of that day a zest similar to that we should enjoy if the editors of two opposing political newspapers should meet in a hall filled with their subscribers, and fling their thundering edito- BEN JONSON. 101 rials in person at each other's heads. The theatre-goers seem to have declared for Dekkar and Marston ; and Ben, disgusted with such a proof of their incapacity of right judgment, sulked and growled in his den, and for two years gave nothing to the stage. He kad^ however, found a patron, who enabled him to do this without under- going the famine of insufficient meat, and the still mora dreadful drought of insufficient drink ; for, in a gossip- ing diary of the period, covering these two years, we are informed, " B. J. now lives with one Tovvnsend, and scorns the world.^^ While, however, pleasantly engaged in this characteristic occupation, for which he had a nat- ural genius, he was meditating a play which he thought would demonstrate to all judging spirits his possession equally of the acquirements of the scholar and the tal- ents of the dramatist. In the conclusion of the Apolo- getic Dialogue which accompanies The Poetaster, he had hinted his purpose in these energetic lines : — " Once I '11 say, — To strike the ears of Time in these fresh strains, As shall, beside the cunning of their ground, Give cause to some of wonder, some despite, And more despair to imitate their sound. I that spend half my nights and all my days Here in a cell, to get a dark, pale face, To come forth with the ivy and the bays, And in this age can hope no better grace, — 102 BEN JONSON. Leave me ! There 's something come into ray thought, That must and shall toe sung high and aloof, Safe from the wolfs black jaw, and the dull ass's hoof! " Accordingly, in 1603, he produced his weighty trage- dy of Sejanus, at Shakespeare's theatre. The Globe, — Shakespeare himself acting one of the inferior parts. Think of Shakespeare laboriously committing to mem- ory the blank verse of Jonson ! Though Sejanus failed of theatrical success, its wealth of knowledge and solid thought made it the best of all answers to his opponents. It was as if they had questioned his capacity to build a ship, and he had confuted them with a man-of-war. To be sure, they might reiterate their old charge of " filching by transla- tion," for the text of Sejanus is a mosaic ; but it was one of Jonson's maxims that he deserved as much honor for what he reproduced from the classics as for what he originated. Indeed, in his dealings with the great poets and historians of Rome, whose language and much of whose spirit he had patiently mastered, he acted the part, not of the pickpocket, but of the conqueror. He did not meanly crib and pilfer in the territories of the ancients : he rather pillaged, or, in our American phrase, " annexed " them. " He has done his robberies so openly," says Dryden, " that one sees he fears not to be taxed by any law. He invades authors like a BEN JONSON. 103 monarch, and what would be theft in any other poet is only victory in him." One incident connected with the bringing out of Se- janus should not be omitted. Jonson told Drummond that the Earl of Northampton had a mortal enmity to him "for beating, on a St. George's day, one of his at- tenders " ; and he adds, that Northampton had him " called before the Councell for his Sejanus," and ac- cused him there both of " Poperie and treason." Jonson's relations with Shakespeare seem always to have been friendly ; and about this time we hear of them as associate members of the greatest of literary and of convivial clubs, — the club instituted by Sir Walter Raleigh, and known to all after-times as the " Mermaid," being so called from the tavern in which the meetings were held. Various, however, as were the genius and accomplishments it included, it lacked one phase of ability which has deprived us of all participa- tion in its wit and wisdom. It could boast of Shake- speare, and Jonson, and Raleigh, and Camden, and Beaumont, and Selden ; but, alas ! it had no Boswell to record its words, " So nimble, and so full of subtile flame." There are traditions of " wit-combats " between Shake- speare and Jonson ; and doubtless there was many a discussion between them touching the different principles 104 BEN JONSON. on which their dramas were composed ; and then Ben, astride his high horse of the classics, probably blustered and harangued, and graciously informed the world's greatest poet that he sometimes wanted art and some- times sense, and candidly advised him to check the fatal rapidity and perilous combinations of his imagination, — ' while Shakespeare smilingly listened, and occasionally put in an ironic word, deprecating such austere criticism of a playwright like himself, who accommodated his art to the humors of the mob that crowded the " round O " of the Globe. There can be no question that Shake- speare saw Ben through and through, but he was not a man to be intolerant of foibles, and probably enjoyed the hectoring egotism of his friend as much as he appre- ciated his real merits. As for Ben, the transcendent genius of his brother dramatist pierced through even the thick hide of his self-sufficiency. " I did honor him," he finely says, " this side of idolatry, as much as any other man." On the accession of James of Scotland to the English throne, Jonson was employed by the court and city to design a splendid pageant for the monarch's reception ; and, with that absence of vindictiveness which some- what atoned for his arrogance, he gave his recent enemy, Dekkar, three fifths of the job. About the same time he was reconciled toMarston ; and in 1605 assisted BEN JONSON. 105 him and Chapman in a comedy called " Eastward Hoe ! " One passage in this, reflecting on the Scotch, gave mor- tal offence to James's greedy countrj^men, who invaded England in his train, and were ravenous and clamorous for the spoils of office. Captain Seagul, in the play, praises what was then the new settlement of Virginia, as " a place without sergeants, or courtiers, or lawyers, or intelligencers, only a few industrious Scots perhaps, who indeed are dispersed over the whole earth. But as for them, there are no greater friends to Englishmen and England, when they are out on 't, in the world, than they are ; and, for my own part, I would a hundred thousand of them were there, for we are all one coun- trymen now, ye know, and we should find ten times more comfort of them there than we do here." This bitter taunt, which probably made the theatre roar with applause, was so represented to the king, that Marston and Chapman were arrested and imprisoned. Jonsop nobly insisted on sharing their fate ; and as he had powerful friends at court, and was esteemed by James himself, his course may have saved his friends from dis- graceful mutilations. A report was circulated that the noses and ears of all three were to be slit ; and Jonson tells us that, in an entertainment he gave to Camden, Selden, and other friends, after his liberation, his old mother exhibited a paper full of " lustie strong poison," 5* 106 BEN JONSON. which she said she had intended to mix in his drinh^ in case the threat of such a shameful punishment were officially announced. The phrase, " his drink," is very characteristic ; and, whatever liquid was meant, we may be sure tha^ it was not water, and that the good lady would have <^-Aily had numerous opportunities to mix the poison with it. The five years which succeeded his imprisonment carried Jonson to the height of his prosperity and glory. During this period he produced the three great come- dies on which his fame as a dramatist rests, — The Fox, The Silent Woman, and The Alchymist, — and also many of the most beautiful of those Masques, performed at court, in which the ingenuity, delicacy, richness, and elevation of his fancy found fittest expression. His social position was probably superior to Shakespeare's. He was really the Court Poet long before 1616, when he received the office, with a pension of a hundred marks. We have Clarendon's testimony to the fact that " his conversation was very good, and with men of the best note." Among his friends occurs the great name of Bacon. In 1618, when "Ben Jonson" had come to be a familiar name on the lips of all educated men in the island, he made his celebrated journey on foot to Scot- land, and was hospitably entertained by the nobility and BEN JONSONo 107 gentry around Edinburgh. Taylor, the water poet, in his " Pennylesse Pilgrimage " to Scotland, has this amiable reference to him. " At Leith," he says, " I found my long approved and assured good friend, Mas- ter Benjamin Jonson, at one Master John Stuart's house. I thank him for his great kindness ; for, at my taking leave of him, he gave me a piece of gold of two-and-twenty shillings' value, to drink his health in England." One object of Jonson's journey w^s to visit the poet Drummond. He passed three or four weeks with Drummond at Hawthornden, and poured out his mind to him without reserve or stint. The fini- cal and fastidious poet was somewhat startled at this irruption of his burly guest into his dainty solitude, took notes of his free conversation, especially when he decried his contemporaries, and further performed the rites of ho'^pitality by adding a caustic, though keen, summary of his qualities of character. Thus, accord- ing to his dear friend's charitable analysis, Ben " was a great lover and praiser of himself; a contemner and scorner of others ; given rather t-^ losse a friend than a jest ; jealous of every word and action of those about him (especiallie after drink, which is one of the ele- ments in which he liveth) ; a dissembler of ill parts which raigne in him, a bragger of some good that he wanteth ; thinketh nothing well bot what either he him- 108 BEN JONSON. self or some of his friends and countrymen have said or done ; he is passionately kynde and angry ; careless either to gaine or keep ; vindictive, but, if he be well answered, at himself." It is not much to the credit of Jonson's insight, that, after flooding his pensively taci- turn host with his boisterous and dogmatic talk, he parted with him under the impression that he was leav- ing an assured friend. Ah ! your demure listeners to your unguarded conversation, — they are the ones that give the fatal stabs ! A literal transcript of Drummond's original notes of Jonson's conversations, made by Sir Robert Sibbald about the year 1710, has been published in the collec- tions of the Shakespeare Society. This is a more ex- tended report than that included in Drummond's works, though still not so full as the reader might desire. The stoutness of Ben's character is felt in every utterance. Thus he tells Drummond that " he never esteemed of a man for the name of a lord," — a sentiment which he had expressed more impressively in his published epi- gram on Burleigh : — " Cecil, the grave, the wise, the great, the good, What is there more that can ennoble blood? " He had, it seems, " a minde to be a churchman, and, sg he might have favor to make one sermon to the King, he careth not what thereafter sould befall him ; for he BEN JONSON. 109 would not flatter though he saw Death." Queen Eliza- beth is the mark of a most scandalous imputation, and the mildest of Ben's remarks respecting her is that she " never saw herself, after she became old, in a true glass ; they painted her, and sometymes would vermilion her nose." " Of all styles," he said, " he most loved to be named Honest, and hath of that one hundred letters so naming him." His judgments on other poets were insolently magisterial. " Spenser's stanzas pleased him not, nor his matter " ; Samuel Daniel was a good honest man, but no poet ; Donne, though <' the first poet in the world in some things," for " not keeping of accent, de- served hanging " ; Abram Fraunce, " in his English hexameters, was a foole " ; Sharpham, Day, and Dekkar were all rogues ; Francis Beaumont " loved too much himself and his own verses." Some biographical items in the record of these conversations are of interest. It seems that the first day of every new year the Earl of Pembroke sent him twenty pounds " to buy bookes.'^ By all his plays he never gained two hundred pounds. " Sundry tymes he hath devoured his bookes," that is, sold them .to supply himself with necessaries. When he was imprisoned for killing his brother actor in a duel, in the Queen's time, " his judges could get nothing of him to all their demands but I and No. They placed two damn'd villains, to catch advantage of him, with him, 110 BEN JONSON. but he was advertised by his keeper '* ; and he added, as if the revenge was as terrible as the offence, " of the spies he hath ane epigrame." He told a few personal stories to Drummond, calculated to moderate our won- der that Mrs. Jonson was a shrew ; and, as they were boastingly told, we must suppose that his manners were not so austere as his verse. But perhaps the most characteristic image he has left of himself, through these conversations, is this : " He hath consumed a whole night in lying looking to his great toe, about which he hath seen Tartars and Turks, Romans and Carthagin- ians, feight in his imagination." Jonson's fortunes seem to have suffered little abate- ment until the death of King James, in 1625. Then declining popularity and declining health combined their malice to break the veteran down; and the re- maining twelve years of his life were passed in doing battle with those relentless enemies of poets, — want and disease. The orange — or rather the lemon — was squeezed, and both court and public seemed disposed to throw away the peel. In the epilogue to his play of The New Inn, brought out in 1630, the old tone of de- fiance is gone. He touchingly appeals to the audience as one who is " sick and sad " ; but, with a noble hu- mility, he begs they will refer none of the defects of the work to mental decay^ BEN JONSON. Ill " All that his weak and faltering tongue doth crave Is that you not refer it to his brain ; That 's yet unhurt, although set round with pain." The audience were insensible to this appeal. They found the play dull, and hooted it from the stage. Per- haps, after having been bullied so long, they took de- light in having Ben " on the hip." Charles the First, however, who up to this time seems to have neg- lected his father's favorite, now generously sent him a hundred pounds to cheer him in his misfortunes ; and shortly after he raised his salary, as Court Poet, from a hundred marks to a hundred pounds, adding, in compli- ment to Jonson's known tastes, a tierce of Canary, — a wine of which he was so fond as to be nicknamed, in ironical reference to a corpulence which rather assimi- lated him to the ox, " a Canary bird." It is to this period, we suppose, we must refer his testimony to his own obesity in his Epistle to my Lady Coventry. " So you have gained a Servant and a Muse : The first of which I fear you will refuse, And you may justly : being a tardy, cold, Unprofitable chattle, fat and old, Laden with belly, and doth hardly approach His fi-iends, but to break chairs or crack a coach. His weight is twenty stone, within two pound ; And that 's made up, as doth the purse abound." As his life declined, it does not appear that his dispo' 112 BEN JONSON. sitlon was essentially modified. There are two charac- teristic references to him in his old age, which prove that Ben, attacked by palsy and dropsy, with a reputa- tion perceptibly waning, was Ben still. One is from Sir John Suckling's pleasantly malicious " Session of the Poets " : — " The first that broke silence was good old Ben, Prepared before with Canary wine, And he told them plainly he deserved the bays, For his were called works where others were but plays. " Apollo stopped him there, and bade him not go on ; 'T was merit, he said, and not presumption, Must carry 't; at which Ben turned about, And in great choler offered to go out." That is a saucy touch, — that of Ben's rage when he is told that presumption is not, before Apollo, to take the place of merit, or even to back it ! The other notice is in a letter from Howell to Sir Thomas Hawk, written the year before Jonson's death : — " I was invited yesternight to a solemn supper by B. J,, where you were deeply remembered. There was good company, excellent cheer, choice wines, and jovial welcome. One thing intervened which almost spoiled the relish of the rest, — that B. began to engross all the discourse, to vapor extremely by himself, and, by vilify- BEN JONSON. 113 ing others, to magnify his own Muse. For my part, I am content to dispense with the Roman infirmity of Ben, now that time has snowed upon his pericranium." But this snow of time, however it may have begun to cover up the massive quahties of his mind, seems to have left untouched his strictly poetic faculty. That shone out in his last hours, with more than usual splen- dor, in the beautiful pastoral drama of The Sad Shep- herd ; and it may be doubted if in the whole of his works any other passage can be found so exquisite in sentiment, fancy, and expression as the opening lines of this charming product of his old age. " Here she was wont to go ! and here ! and here ! Just where those daisies, pinks, and violets grow : The world may find the Spring by following her ; For other print her airy steps ne'er left : Her treading would not bend a blade of grass, Or shake the downy blow-ball from his stalk ! But like the soft west- wind she shot along, And where she went the flowers took thickest root, As she had sowed them with her odorous foot ! " Before he could complete The Sad Shepherd he was struck with mortal illness ; and the brave old man pre- pared to meet his last enemy, and, if possible, convert him into a friend. As early as 1606 he had returned to the English Church, after having been for twelve years a Romanist; and his penitent death-bed was 114 BEN JONSON. attended by the Bishop of Winchester. He died in August, 1637, in his sixty-fourth year, and was buried in Westminster Abbey. The inscription on the com- mon pavement stone which was laid over his grave, " O RARE Ben Jonson ! " still expresses, after a lapse of two hundred years, the feelings of all readers of the English race. It must be admitted, however, that this epithet is sufficiently indefinite to allow widely differing estimates of the value of his works. In a critical view, the most obvious characteristic of his mind is its bulk ; but its creativeness bears no proportion to its massiveness. His faculties, ranged according to their relative strength, would fall into this rank : — first, Ben ; next, under- standing ; next, memory ; next, humor ; next, fancy ; and last and least, imagination. Thus, in the strictly poetic action of his mind, his fancy and imagination being subordinated to his other faculties, and not co-or- dinated with them, his whole nature is not kindled, and his best masques and sweetest lyrics give no idea of the general largeness of the man. In them the burly giant becomes gracefully petite; it is Fletcher's Omphale " smiling the club " out of the hand of Hercules, and making him, for the time, " spin her smocks." Now the greatest poetical creations of Shakespeare are those in BEN JONSON. 115 which he is greatest in reason, and greatest in passion, and greatest in knowledge, as well as greatest in imagi- nation, — his poetic power being " Like to the fabled Cytherea's zone, Binding all things with beauty." His mind is " one entire and perfect chrysolite," while Jonson's rather suggests the pudding-stone. The poet in Ben being thus but a comparatively small portion of Ben, works by effort, rather than inspiration, and leaves the impression of ingenuity rather than inven- tiveness. But in his tragedies of Sejanus and Catiline, and especially in his three gre.at comedies of The Fox, The Alchymist, and The Silent Woman, the whole man is thrust forward, with his towering individuality, his massive understanding, his wide knowledge of the baser side of life, his relentless scorn of weakness and wicked- ness, his vivid memory of facts and ideas derived from books. They seem written with his fist. But, though they convey a powerful impression of his collective ability, they do not convey a poetic impression, and hardly an agreeable one. His strongest characters, as might be expected, are not heroes or martyrs, but cheats or dupes. His most magnificent cheat is Volpone, in The Fox ; his most magnificent dupe is Sir Epicure Mammon, in The Alchymist ; but in their most gor- geous mental rioting in imaginary objects of sense, the 116 BEN JONSON. effect is produced by a dogged accumulation of suc- cessive images, which are linked by no train of strictly imaginative association, and are not fused into unity of purpose by the fire of passion-penetrated imagination. Indeed, it is a curious psychological study to watch the laborious process by which Jonson drags his thoughts and fancies from the reluctant and resisting soil of his mind, and then lays them, one after the other, with a deep-drawn breath, on his page. Each is forced into form by main strength, as we sometimes see a pillar of granite wearily drawn through the street by a score of straining oxen. Take, for example. Sir Epicure Mammon's detail of the luxuries he will revel in when his possession of the philosopher's stone shall have given him boundless wealth. The first cup of Canary and the first tug of invention bring up this enormous piece of humor : — " My flatterers Shall be tlie pure and gravest of divines That I can get for money." Then another wrench of the mind, and, it is to be feared, another swallow of the liquid, and we have this : — " My meat shall all come in in Indian shells, Dishes of agate, set in gold, and studded With emeralds, sapphires, hyacinths, and rubies." Glue that on, and now for another tug : — BEN JONSON. 117 " My shirts I '11 have of taffeta-sarsnet, soft and light As cobwebs ; and for all mj other raiment, It shall be such as might provoke the Persian, Were he to teach the world riot anew." And then, a little heated, his imagination is stung into action, and this refinement of sensation flashes out : — " My gloves of fishes' and birds' skins perfumed With gums of Paradise and Eastern air.'' And now we have an extravagance jerked violently out from his logical fancy : — " I will have all my beds blown up, not stuffed ; Down is too hard." But all this patient accumulation of particulars, each costing a mighty ejBfort of memory or analogy, produces no cumulative effect. Certainly, the word " strains," as employed to designate the effusions of poetry, has a peculiar significance as applied to Jonson's verse. No hewer of wood or drawer of water ever earned his daily wages by a more conscientious putting forth of daily labor. Critics — and among the critics Ben is the most clamorous — call upon us to admire and praise the construction of his plays. But his plots, admirable of their kind, are still but elaborate contrivances of the understanding, all distinctly thought out beforehand by the method of logic, not the method of imagination i 118 BEN JONSON. regular in external form, but animated by no living internal principle ; artful, but not artistic ; ingenious schemes, not organic growths ; and conveying the same kind of pleasure we experience in inspecting other mechanical contrivances. His method is neither the method of nature nor the method of art, but the method of artifice. A drama of Shakespeare may be compared to an oak ; a drama by Jon son to a cunningly fashioned box, made of oak-wood, with some living plants growing in it. Jonson is big ; Shakespeare is great. Still we say, " O rare Ben Jonson ! " A large, rude, clumsy, English force, irritable, egotistic, dogmatic, and quarrelsome, but brave, generous, and placable; with no taint of a malignant vice in his boisterous foibles ; with a good deal of the bulldog in him, but nothing of the spaniel, and one whose growl was ever worse than his bite ; — he, the bricklayer's apprentice, fighting his way to eminence through the roughest obstacles, capable of wrath, but incapable of falsehood, willing to boast, but scorning to creep, still sturdily keeps his hard- won position among the Elizabethan worthies as poet, playwright, scholar, man of letters, man of muscle and brawn ; as friend of Beaumont and Fletcher and Chap- man and Bacon and Shakespeare ; and as ever ready, in all places and at all times, to assert the manhood of Ben by tongue and pen and sword. MINOE ELIZABETHAN" DEAMATISTS. TN the present chapter we propose to consider six dramatists who were more immediately the contem- poraries of Shakespeare and Jonson, and who have the precedence in time, — and three of them, if we may be- lieve some critics, not altogether without claim to the precedence in merit, — of Beaumont and Fletcher, Mas- singer, and Ford. These are Heywood, Middleton, Marston, Dekkar, Webster, and Chapman. They belong to the school of dramatists of which Shakespeare was the head, and which is distinguished from the school of Jonson by essential differences of principle. Jonson constructed his plays on definite ex- ternal rules, and could appeal confidently to the critical understanding, in case the regularity of his plot and the keeping of his characters were called in question. Shakespeare constructed Ms, not according to any rules which could be drawn from the practice of other dram- atists, but according to those interior laws which the mind, in its creative action, instinctively divines and spontaneously obeys. In his case, the appeal is not to the understanding alone, but to the feelings and faculties 120 MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. wliich were concerned in producing the work itself; and tlie symmetry of the whole is felt by hundreds who could not frame an argument to sustain it. The laws to which his genius submitted were diflferent from those to which other dramatists had submitted, because the time, the circumstances, the materials, the purpose aimed at, were different. The time demanded a drama which should represent human life in all its diversity, and in which the tragic and comic, the high and the low, should be in juxtaposition, if not in combination. The dram- atists of whom we are about to speak represented them in juxtaposition, and rarely succeeded in vitally com- bining them so as to produce symmetrical works. Their comedy and tragedy, their humor and passion, move in parallel rather than in converging lines. They have di- versity ; but as their diversity neither springs from, nor tends to, a central principle of organization or of order, the result is often a splendid anarchy of detached scenes, more effective as detached than as related. Shakespeare alone had the comprehensive energy of impassioned imagination to fuse into unity the almost unmanageable materials of his drama, to organize this anarchy into a new and most complex order, and to make a world-wide variety of character and incident consistent with one- ness of impression. Jonson, not pretending to give his work this organic form, put forth his whole strength to MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 121 give it mechanical regularity, every line in his solide?t plays costing him, as the wits said, '' a cup of sack." But the force implied in a Shakespearian drama, a force that crushes and dissolves the resisting materials into their elements, and recombines or fuses them into a new substance, is a force so different in kind from Jonson's, that it would, of course, be idle to attempt an estimate of its superiority in degree. And in regard to those minor dramatists who will be the subjects of the present essay, if they fall below Jonson in general ability, they nearly all afford scenes and passages superior to his best in depth of passioi), vigor of imagination, and audacious self-committal to the primitive instincts of the heart. The most profuse, but perhaps the least poetic of these dramatists, was Thomas Heywood, of whom little is known, except that he was one of the most prolific writers the world has ever seen. In 1598 he became an actor, or, as Henslowe, who employed him, phrases it, " came and hired himself to me as a covenanted servant for two years." The date of his first published drama is 1601 ; that of his last published work, a Gen- eral History of Women, is 1657. As early as 1633 he represents himself as having had an " entire hand, or at least a main finger," in two hundred and twenty plays, of which only twenty-three were printed. True it is, he says, " that my plays are not exposed to the world in 6 122 MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. volumes, to bear the title of Works, as others : one rea- son is, that many of them, by shifting and change of companies, have been negligently lost ; others of them are still retained in the hands of some actors, who think it against their peculiar profit to have them come in print ; and a third, that it was never any great ambition in me to be in this kind voluminously read." It was said of him, by a contemporary, that " he not only acted every day, but also obliged himself to write a sheet every- day for several years ; but many of his plays being com- posed loosely in taverns, occasions them to be so mean." Besides his labors as a playwright, he worked as trans- lator, versifier, and general maker of books. Late in life he conceived the design of writing the lives of all the poets of the world, including his contemporaries. Had this project been carried out, we should have known something about the external life of Shakespeare ; for Heywood must have carried in his brain many of those facts which we of this age are most curious to know. Heywood's best plays evince large observation, con- siderable dramatic skill, a sweet and humane spirit, and an easy command of language. His style, indeed, is singularly simple, pure, clear, and straightforward ; but it conveys the impression of a mind so diffused as almost to be characterless, and incapable of flashing its thoughts through the images of imaginative passion. He MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 123 is more prosaic, closer to ordinary life and character, than his contemporaries. Two of his plays, and the best of them all, A Woman Killed with Kindness, and The English Traveller, are thoroughly domestic dramas, the first, and not the worst, of their class. The plot of' The English Traveller is specially good ; and in read- ing few works of fiction do we receive a greater shock of surprise than in Geraldine's discovery of the infidel- ity of Wincott's wife, whom he loves with a Platonic devotion. It is as unanticipated as the discovery, in Jonson's Silent Woman, that Epicoene is no woman at all, while at the same time it has less the appearance of artifice, and is more the result of natural causes. With less fluency of diction, less skill in fastening the reader's interest to his fable, harsher in versification, and generally clumsier in construction, the best plays of Thomas Middleton are still superior to Heywood's in force of imagination, depth of passion, and fulness of matter. It must, however, be admitted that the senti- ments which direct his powers are not so fine as Hey- wood's. He depresses the mind, rather than invigorates it. The eye he cast on human life was not the eye of a sympathizing poet, but rather that of a sagacious cynic. His observation, though sharp, close, and vigi- lant, is somewhat ironic and unfeeling. His penetrating, incisive intellect cuts its way to the heart of a character 124 MINOK ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. as with a knife ; and if he lays bare its throbs of guilt and weakness, and lets you into the secrets of its organization, he conceives his whole work is performed. This criticism applies even to his tragedy of Women Beware Women, a drama which shows a deep study of the sources of human frailty, considerable skill in ex- hibiting the passions in their consecutive, if not in their conflicting action, and a firm hold upon character ; but it lacks pathos, tenderness, and humanity ; its power is out of all proportion to its geniality ; the characters, while they stand definitely out to the eye, are seen through no visionary medium of sentiment and fancy ; and the reader feels the force of Leantio's own agoniz- ing complaint, that his affliction is " Of greater weight than youth was made to bear, As if a punishment of after-life Were fall'n upon man here, so new it is To flesh and blood, so strange, so insupportable." There is, indeed, no atmosphere to Middleton's mind ; and the hard, bald caustic peculiarity of his genius, which is unpleasingly felt in reading any one of his plays, becomes a source of painful weariness as we plod doggedly through the five thick volumes of his works. Like the incantations of his own witches, it " casts a thick scurf over life." It is most powerfully felt in his tragedy of The Changeling, at once the most oppress- MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 125 ivG and impressive effort of his genius. The character of De Flores in this play has in it a strangeness of iniquity, such as we think is hardly paralleled in the whole range of the Elizabethan drama. The passions of this brute-imp are not human. They are such as might be conceived of as springing from the union of animal with fiendish impulses, in a nature which knew no law outside of its own lust, and was as incapable of a scruple as of a sympathy. But of all the dramatists of the time, the most dis- agreeable in disposition, though by no means the least powerful in mind, was John Marston. The time of his birth is not known ; his name is entangled in contempo- rary records with that of another John Marston; and we may be sure that his mischief-loving spirit would have been delighted could he have anticipated that the antiquaries, a century after his death, would be driven to despair by the difficulty of discriminating one from the other. It is more than probable, however, that he was the John Marston who was of a respectable family in Shropshire, who took his bachelor's degree at Oxford in 1592, and who was afterwards married to a daughter of a chaplain of James the First. Whatever may have been Marston's antecedents, they were such as to gratify his tastes as a cynical observer of the crimes and follies of men, — ■ an observer whose hatred of evil 126 MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. sprang from no love of good, but to whom the sight of depravity and baseness was welcome, inasmuch as it afforded him the occasion to indulge his own scorn and pride. His ambition was to be the English Juvenal ; and it must be conceded that he had the true lago-like disposition " to spy out abuses." Accordingly, in 1598, he published a series of venomous satires called The Scourge of Villanie, rough in versification, condensed in thought, tainted in matter, evincing a cankered more than a caustic spirit, and producing an effect at once indecent and inhuman. To prove that this scourging of villany, which would have put Mephistopheles to the blush, was inspired by no respect for virtue, he soon followed it up with a poem so licentious that, before it was circulated to any extent, it was suppressed by order of Archbishop Whitgift, and nearly all the copies de- stroyed. A writer could not be thus dishonored without being brought prominently into notice, and old Hens- lowe, the manager, was after him at once to secure his libellous ability for the Rose. Accordingly, we learn from Henslowe's diary, under date of September 28, 1599, that he had lent to William Borne, " to lend unto John Mastone," " the new poete," " the sum of forty shillings," in earnest of some work not named. There is an undated letter of Marston to Henslowe, written probably in reference to this matter, which is character- istic in its disdainfully confident tone. Thus it runs : -^ MINOE ELIZABETHAN DRA^JATISTS. 127 " Mr. Henslowe, at the Rose on the Bankside. " If you like my playe of Columbus, it is verie well, and you shall give me noe more than twentie poundes for it, but If nott, lett me have it by the Bearer againe, as I know the kinges men will freelie give me as much for it, and the profitts of the third daye moreover. " Soe I rest yours, " John Marston." He seems not to have been popular among the band of dramatists he now joined, and it is probable that his insulting manners were not sustained by corresponding courage. Ben Jonson had many quarrels with him, both literary and personal, and mentions one occasion on which he beat him and took away his pistol. His temper was Italian, rather than English, and one would conceive of him as quicker with the stiletto than the fist. His connection with the stage ceased, in 1613, after he had produced a number of dramas, of which nine have been preserved. He died about twenty years after- wards, in 1634, seemingly in comfortable circumstances. Marston's plays, whether comedies or tragedies, all bear the mark of his bitter and misanthropic spirit, — a spirit that seemed cursed by the companionship of its own thoughts, and forced them out through a well- grounded fear that they would fester if left within. His 128 MINOE ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. comedies of The Malcontent, The Fawn, and What You Will, have no genuine mirth, though an abundance of scornful wit, — ^of wit which, in his own words, " stings, blisters, galls off the skin, with the acrimony of its sharp quickness." The baser its objects, the brighter its gleam. It is stimulated by the desire to give pain, rather than the wish to communicate pleas- ure. Marston is not without sprightliness, but his sprightliness is never the sprightliness of the kid, though it is sometimes that of the hyena, and sometimes that of the polecat. In his Malcontent he probably drew a flattering likeness of his inner self: yet the most com- passionate reader of the play would experience little prty in seeing the Malcontent hanged. So much, in- deed, of Marstpn's satire is directed at depravity, that Ben Jonson used to say that " Marston wrote his father- in-law's preachings, and his father-in-law- his comedies." It is to be hoped, however, that the spirit of the chap- lain's tirades against sins was not, like his son-in-law's, worse than the sins themselves. If Marston's comic vein is thus, to use one of Dek- kar's phrases, that of " a thorny-toothed rascal," it may be supposed that his tragic is a still fiercer libel on humanity. His tragedies, indeed, though not without a gloomy power, are extravagant and horrible in con- ception and conduct. Even when he copies, he makes I MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 129 the thing his own by caricaturing it. Thus the plot of Antonio' 3 Revenge is plainly taken from Hamlet, but it is Hamlet passed through Marston's intellect and imagination, and so debased as to look original. Still, the intellect in Marston's tragedies strikes the reader as forcible in itself, and as capable of achieving excellence, if it could only be divorced from the bad disposition and dt'formed conscience which direct its exercise. He has iancy, and he frequently stutters into imagination ; but the imp that controls his heart corrupts his taste and taints his sense of beauty, and the result is that he has a malicious satisfaction in deliberately choosing words whose uncouthness finds no extenuation in their expres- siv^eness, and in forging elaborate metaphors which dis- gust rather than delight. His description of a storm at sea is among the least unfavorable specimens of this perversion of his poetical powers : — " The sea grew mad; Strait swarthy darkness popt out Phoebus' eye, And blurred the jocund face of bright-cheek' d day; Whilst cruddled fogs masked even darkness' brow ; Heaven bade 's good night, and the rocks groaned At the intestine uproar of the main." It must be allowed that both his tragedies and come- dies are full of strong and striking thoughts, which 6* I 130 MINOE ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. show a searching inquisition into the worst parts of hu- man nature. Occasionally he expresses a general truth with great felicity, as when he says, " Pygmy cares Can shelter under patience' shield ; but giant griefs WiU burst all covert." His imagination is sometimes stimulated into unusual power in expressing the fiercer and darker passions ; as, for example, in this image : — " 0, my soul 's enthro&ed In the triumphant chariot of revenge ! " And in this : — " Ghastly Amazement, with upstarted hair, Shall hurry on before, and usher us. Whilst trumpets clamor with a sound of death." He has three descriptions of morning, which seem to have been written in emulation of Shakespeare's in Hamlet ; two of them being found in the tragedy which Hamlet suggested. " Is not yon gleam the shuddering morn that flakes With silver tincture the east verge of heaven ? For see the dapple-gray coursers of the morn Beat up the light with their bright silver hoofs, And chase it through the sky. Darkness is fled ; look, infant morn hath drawn MINOE ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 131 Bright silver curtains 'bout the couch of night; And now Aurora's horse trots azure rings, Breathing fair hght about the firmament." These last two lines appear feeble enough as con- trasted with the beautiful intensity of imagination in Emerson's picturing of the same scene : — " 0, tenderly the haughty Day Fills his blue urn mthjire.^' The most beautiful passage in Mars ton's plays is the lament of a father over the dead body of his son, who has been defamed. It is so apart from his usual style, as to breed the suspicion that the worthy chaplain's daughter, whom he made Mrs. Marston, must have given it to him from her purer imagination : — " Look on those lips, Those now lawn piUows, on whose tender softness Chaste modest speech, stealing from out his breast, Had wont to rest itself, as loath to post From out so fair an inn : look, look, they seem To stir, And breathe defiance to black obloquy." If among the dramatists of the period any person could be selected who in disposition was the opposite of Marston, it would be Thomas Dekkar, — a man whose inborn sweetness and gleefulness of soul carried him through vexations and miseries which would have 132 MINOE ELIZABETHAN DRAxMATISTS. crushed a spirit less hopeful, cheerful, and humane. He was probably born about the year 1575 ; commenced his career as player and playwright before 1598 ; and for forty years was an author by profession, that is, was occupied in fighting famine with his pen. The first intelligence we have of him is characteristic of his whole life. It is from Henslowe's diary, under date of February, 1598 : " Lent unto the company, to discharge Mr. Decker out of the counter in the powltry, the sum of 40 shillings." Oldys tells us that " he was in King's Bench Prison from 1613 to 1616"; and the antiquary adds ominously, " how much longer I know not." Indeed, Dr. Johnson's celebrated enumeration of the scholar's experiences would stand for a biography of Dekkar : — "Toil, envy, want, the patron, and the jail." This forced familiarity with poverty and distress does not seem to have imbittered his feelings or weakened the force and elasticity of his mind. He turned his calamities into commodities. If indigence threw him into the society of the ignorant, the wretched, and the depraved, he made the knowledge of low life he thus obtained, serve his purpose as dramatist or pamphleteer. Whatever may have been the effect of his vagabond habits on his principles, they did not stain the sweetness and purity of his sentiments. There is an innocency in MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 133 his very coarseness, and a brisk, bright good-nature chirps in his very scurrility. In the midst of distresses of all kinds, he still seems, like his own Fortunatus, " all felicity up to the brims " ; but that his content with Fortune is not owing to an unthinking ignorance of her caprice and injustice is proved by the words he puts into her mouth : — " This world is Fortune's ball wherewith she sports. Sometimes I strike it up into the air, And then create I emperors and kings ; Sometimes I spurn it, at which spurn crawls out The wild beast multitude : curse on, you fools, 'T is I that tumble princes from their thrones, And gild false brows with glittering diadems ; 'T is I that tread on necks of conquerors, And when like semi-gods they have been drawn In ivory chariots to the Capitol, Circled about with wonder of all eyes. The shouts of every tongue, love of all hearts. Being swoln with their own greatness, I have pricked The bladder of their pride, and made them die As water-bubbles (without memory): I thrust base cowards into honor's chair, Whilst the true-spirited soldier stands by Bareheaded, and all bare, whilst at his scars They scoff, that ne'er durst view the face of wars. I set an idiot's cap on virtue's head, Turn learning out of doors, clothe wit in rags, And paint ten thousand images of loam In gaudy silken colors: on the backs 134 MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. Of mules and asses I make asses ride, Only for sport to see the apish world Worship such beasts with sound idolatry. . This Fortune does, and when aU this is done, She sits and smiles to hear some curse her name, And some with adoration crown her fame." The boundless beneficence of Dekkar's heart is spe- cially embodied in the character of the opulent lord, Ja- como Gentili, in his play of The Wonder of a King- dom. When Gentili's steward brings him the book in which the amount of his charities is recorded, he ex- claims impatiently : — " Thou vain vainglorious fool, go burn that book; No herald needs to blazon charity's arms. I lamich not forth a ship, with drums and guns And trumpets, to proclaim my gallantry ; He that will read the wasting of my gold Shall find it writ in ashes, which the wind Will scatter ere he spells it." He will have neither wife nor children. When, he says, " I shall have one hand in heaven. To write my happiness in leaves of stars, A wife would pluck me by the other down. This bark has thus long sailed about the world, My soul the pilot, and yet never listened To such a mermaid's song. MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 135 My heirs shall be poor children fed on alms : Soldiers that want limbs ; scholars poor and scorned ; And these will be a sure inheritance Not to decay ; manors and towns will fall, Lordships and parks, pastures and woods, be sold; But this land still continues to the lord : No tricks of law can me beguile of this. But of the beggar's dish, I shall drink healths To last forever ; whilst I live, my roof Shall cover naked wretches ; when I die, 'T is dedicated to St. Charity." We should not do justice to Dekkar's dispositioiij even after these quotations, did we omit that enumer- ation of positives and negatives which, in his view, make up the character of the happy man : — " He that in the sun is neither beam nor moat, He that 's not mad after a petticoat. He for whom poor men's curses dig no grave, He that is neither lord's nor lawyer's slave, He that makes This his sea and That his shore. He that in 's coffin is richer than before. He that counts Youth his sword and Age his staff, He whose right hand carves his own epitaph. He that upon his death-bed is a swan. And dead no crow, — he is a Happy Man." As Dekkar wrote under the constant goad of neces- sity, he seems to have been indifferent to the require- ments of art. That " wet-eyed wench, Care," was as 136 MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. absent from his ink, as from his soul. Even his best plays, Old Fortunatus, The Wonder of a Kingdom, and another whose title cannot be mentioned, are good in particular scenes and characters rather than good as wholes. Occasionally, as in the character of Signior Orlando Friscobaldo, he strikes off a fresh, original, and masterly creation, consistently sustained throughout, and charming us by its lovableness, as well as thrilling us by its power ; but generally his sentiment and imagination break upon us in unexpected felicities, strangely better than what surrounds them. These have been culled by the affectionate admiration of Lamb, Hunt, and Hazlitt, and made familiar to all English readers. To prove how much finer, in its essence, his genius was than the genius of so eminent a dramatist as Massinger, we only need to compare Massinger's portions of the play of The Virgin Martyr with Dekkar's. The scene between Doro- thea and Angelo, in which she recounts her first meeting with him as a " sweet-faced beggar-boy," and the scene in which Angelo brings to Theophilus the basket of fruits and flowers which Dorothea has plucked in Paradise, are inexpressibly beautiful in their exquisite subtlety of imagination and artless elevation of sentiment. It is difficult to understand how a writer capable of such refinements as these should have left no drama which is a part of the classical literature of his country. MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 137 One of these scenes — that between Dorothea, the Virgin Martyr, and Angelo, an angel who waits upon her in the disguise of a page — we cannot refrain from quoting, familiar as it must be to many readers : — " Dor. My book and taper. " Ang. Here, most holy mistress. " Dor. Thy voice sends forth such music, that I never Was ravished with a more celestial sound. Were every servant in the world like thee, So full of goodness, angels would come down To dwell with us : thy name is Angelo, And like that name thou art. Get thee to rest; Thy youth with too much watching is oppressed. " Ang. No, my dear lady; I could weary stars, And force the wakeful moon to lose her eyes, By my late watching, but to wait on you. When at your prayers you kneel before the altar, Methinks I 'm singing with some quire in heaven, So blest I hold me in your company. Therefore, my most loved mistress, do not bid Your boy, so serviceable, to get hence. For then you break his heart. " Dor. Be nigh me still then. In golden letters down I '11 set that day Which gave thee to me. Little did I hope To meet such worlds of comfort in thyself. This little pretty body, when I, coming Forth of the temple, heard my beggar-boy, My sweet-faced, godly beggar boy, crave an alms, Which with glad hand I gave, — with lucky hand ! And when I took thee home, my most chaste bosom 138 MlJsIOR ELIZABETHAN DKAMATISTS. Methought was filled with no hot wanton fire, But with a holy flame, mounting since higher, On wings of cherubim, than it did before. " Ang. Proud am I that my lady's modest eye So likes so poor a servant. " Dor. I have offered Handfuls of gold but to behold thy parents. I would leave kingdoms, were I queen of some, To dwell with thy good father Show me thy parents 5 Be not ashamed. ^^ Ang. I am not: I did never Know who my mother was ; but by yon palace, Filled with bright heavenly courtiers, I dare assure you, And pawn these eyes upon it, and this hand. My father is in heaven ; and, pretty mistress. If your illustrious hom"-glass spend his sand. No worse than yet it does, upon my life, You and I both shall meet my father there. And he shall bid you welcome. " Dor. blessed day ! We all long to be there, but lose the way." But the passage in all Dekkar's works which will be most likely to immortalize his name is that often-quoted one, taken from a play whose very name is unmention- able to prudish ears : — " Patience, my lord ! why, 't is the soul of peace ; Of all the virtues, 't is nearest kin to heaven ; It makes men look like gods. — The best of men That e'er wore earth about him was a Sufferer, MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 139 A soft, meek, patient, humble, tranquil spirit ; The first true gentleman that ever breathed." A more sombre genius than Dekkar, though a genius more than once associated with his own in composition, was John Webster, of whose biography nothing is cer- tainly known, except that he was a member of the Merchant Tailors' Company. His works have been thrice republished within thirty years ; but the perusal of the whole does not add to the impression left on the mind by his two great tragedies. His comic talent was small ; and for all the mirth in his comedies of West- ward Hoe and Northward Hoe we are probably in- debted to his associate, Dekkar. His play of Appius and Virginia is far from being an adequate rendering of one of the most beautiful and affecting fables that ever crept into history. The Devil's Law Case, a tragi- comedy, has not sufficient power to atone for the want of probability in the plot and want of nature in the characters. The historical play of Sir Thomas Wyatt can only be fitly described by using the favorite word in which Ben Jonson was wont to condense his critical opinions, — " It is naught." But The White Devil and The Duchess of Malfy are tragedies which even so rich and varied a literature as the English could not lose without a sensible diminution of its treasures. Webster was one of those writers whose genius con- 140 MINOK ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. sists in the expression of special moods, and who, outside of those moods, cannot force their creative faculties into vigorous action. His mind by instinctive sentiment was directed to the contemplation of the darker aspects of life. He brooded over crime and misery until his imagination was enveloped in their atmosphere, found a fearful joy in probing their sources and tracing their consequences, became strangely familiar with their physiognomy and psychology, and felt a shuddering sympathy with their " deep groans and terrible ghastly looks." There was hardly a remote corner of the soul, which hid a feeling capable of giving mental pain, into which this artist in agony had nt)t curiously peered ; and his meditations on the mysterious disorder pro- duced in the human consciousness by the rebound of thoughtless or criminal deeds might have found fit ex- pression in the lines of a great poet of our own times : — " Action is momentary, — The motion of a muscle, this way or that. Suffering is long, obscure, and infinite." With this proclivity of his imagination, Webster's power as a dramatist consists in confining the domain of his tragedy within definite limits, in excluding all variety of incident and character which could interfere with his main design of awaking terror and pity, and m MINOK ELIZABETHAN DKAMATISTS. 141 the intensity with which he arrests, and the tenacity with which he holds the attention, as he drags the mind along the pathway which begins in misfortune or guilt, and ends in death. He is such a spendthrift of his stimulants, and accumulates horror on horror, and crime on crime, with such fatal facility, that he would render the mind callous to his terrors, were it not that what is acted is still less than what is suggested, and that the souls of his characters are greater than their sufferings or more terrible than their deeds. The crimes and the criminals belong to Italy as it was in the sixteenth century, when poisoning and assassination were almost in the fashion ; the feelings with which they are regarded are English ; and the result of the combination is to make the poisoners and assassins more , fiendishly malignant in spirit than they actually wereJ Thus Ferdinand, in the Duchess of Malfy, is the concep- tion formed by an honest, deep-thoughted Englishman of an Italian duke and politician, who had been educated in those maxims of policy which were generalized by Machiavelli. Webster makes him a devil, but a devil with a soul to be damned. The Duchess, his sister, is discovered to be secretly married to her steward ; and in connection with his brother, the Cardinal, the Duke not only resolves on her death, but devises a series of pre- liminary mental torments to madden and break down her 142 MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. proud spirit. The first is an exhibition of wax figures, representing her husband and children as they appeared in death. Then comes a dance of madmen, with dismal howls and songs and speeches. Then a tomb-maker whose talk is of the charnel-house, and who taunts her with her mortality. She interrupts his insulting homily with the exclamation, " Am I not thy Duchess ? " " Thou art," he scornfully replies, " some great woman sure, for riot begins to sit on thy forehead (clad in gray hairs) twenty years sooner than on a merry milkmaid's. Thou sleepest worse than if a mouse should be forced to take up her lodging in a cat' s ear ; a little infant that breeds its teeth, should it lie with thee, would cry out, as if thou wert the more unquiet bedfellow." This mockery only brings from her firm spirit the proud assertion, "I am Duchess of Malfy still." Indeed, her mind becomes clearer and calmer as the tor- tures proceed. At first she had imprecated curses on her brothers, and cried, " Plagues that make lanes through largest families, Consume them ! " But now, when the executioners appear, when her dirge is sung, containing those tremendous lines, " Of what is 't fools make such vam keeping ? Sin their conception, their birth weeping, Their life a general mist of error, Their death a hideous storm of terror," — I\II:mOR ELIZABETHAN DRA;vIATISTS. 143 ■when all that malice could suggest for her torment has been expended and the ruffians who have been sent to murder her approach to do their office, her attitude is that of quiet dignity, forgetful of her own sufferings, solicitous for others. Her attendant, Cariola, screams out, " Hence, villains, tyrants, murderers, alas ! What will you do with my lady ? Call for help. " Duchess. To whom, — to our next neighbors ? They are mad folks. " Bosola. Remove that noise. '■''Duchess. Farewell, Cariola. In my last will I have not much to give : A many hungry guests have fed upon me ; Thine will be a poor reversion. " Cariola. I will die with her. " Duchess. I pray thee, look thou giv'st my little boy Some s}Tup for his cold, and let the girl Say her prayers ere she sleep. Now what you please : What death? " Bosola. Strangling ; here are yom' executioners. " Duchess. Pull, and pull strongly, for your able strength Must pull down heaven upon me : ' Yet stay, heaven-gates are not so highly arched As princes' palaces ; they that e^ter there Must go upon their knees. Come^ vJolent d'iath^ Serve for mandragora to make me sl^ep^ Go, tell my brothers ; when I am laid out. They then may feed in quiet." * 144 MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. The strange, unearthly stupor which precedes the remorse of Ferdinand for her murder is true to nature, and especially his nature. Bosola, pointing to the dead body of the Duchess, says, " Fix your eye here. " Ferd. Constantly. " Bosola. Do you not weep ? Other sins only speak ; murther shrieks out : The element of water moistens the earth, But blood flies upwards and bedews the heavens. '■'■Ferd. Cover her face; mine eyes dazzle: She died young. " Bosola. I think not so ; her infelicity Seemed to have years too many. " Ferd. She and I were twins : And should I die this instant, I had lived Her time to a minute." We have said that Webster's peculiarity is the te- nacity of his hold on the mental and moral constitution of his characters. We know of their appetites and pas- sions only by the effects of these on their souls. He has properly no sensuousness. Thus in The White Devil, his other great tragedy, the events proceed from the passion of Brachiano for Vittoria Corombona, — a pas- sion so intense as to lead one to order the murder of his wife, and the other the murder of her husband. If either Fletcher or Ford had attempted the subject, the sensual and emotional motives to the crime would have MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 145 been represented with overpowering force, and expressed in the most alluring images, so that wickedness would have been almost resolved into weakness ; but Webster lifts the wickedness at once from the region of the senses into the region of the soul, exhibits its results in spiritual depravity, and shows the satanic energy of pur- pose which may spring from the ruins of the moral will. There is nothing lovable in Vittoria ; she seems, indeed, almost without sensations; and the affection between her and Brachiano is simply the magnetic attraction which one evil spirit has for another evil spirit. Fran- cisco, the brother of Brachiano's wife, says to him : — " Thou hast a wife, our sister ; would I had given Both her white hands to death, bound and locked fast In her last winding-sheet, when I gave thee But one." This is the language of the intensest passion, but as applied to the adulterous lover of Vittoria it seems little more than the utterance of reasonable regret ; for devil only can truly mate with devil, and Vittoria is Brachi- ano's real " affinity." The moral confusion they produce by their deeds is traced with more than Webster's usual steadiness of nerve and clearness of vision. The evil they inflict is a cause of evil in others ; the passion which leads to murder rouses the fiercer passion which aches for ven- 7 J 146 MINOE ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. geance ; and at last, when the avengers of crime have become morally as bad as the criminals, they are all involved in a common destruction. Vittoria is probably Webster's most powerful delineation. Bold, bad, proud, glittering in her baleful beauty, strong in that evil cour- age which shrinks from crime as little as from danger, she meets her murderers with the same self-reliant scorn with which she met her judges. " Kill her attend- ant first," exclaims one of them. " Vittoria. You shall not kill her first; behold my breast: I will be waited on in death ; my servant Shall never go before me. " Gasparo. Are you so brave ? " Vittoria. Yes, I shall welcome death, As princes do some great ambassadors ; I '11 meet thy weapon half-way. " Lodovico. Strike, strike, With a joint motion. " Vittoria. 'T was a manly blow; The next thou giv'st, murder some sucking infant, And then thou wilt be famous." Webster tells us, in the Preface to The White Devil, that he does not "write with a goose-quill winged with two feathers " ; and also hints that the play failed in representation through its being acted in win- ter in " an open and black theatre," and because it wanted " a full and understanding auditory." " Since that time," he sagely adds, " I have noted most of the MINOE ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 147 people that come to the playhouse resemble those ig- norant asses who, visiting stationers' shops, their use is not to inquire for good books, but new books." And then comes the ever-recurring wail of the playwright, Elizabethan as well as Georgian, respecting the taste of audiences. "Should a man," he says, "present to such an auditory the most sententious tragedy that ever was written, observing all the critical laws, as height of style and gravity of person, enrich it with the senten- tious chorus, and, as it were, enliven death in the pas- sionate and weighty Nuntius ; yet after all this divine rapture, dura messorum ilia, the breath that comes from the uncapable multitude is able to poison it." Of all the contemporaries of Shakespeare, Webster is the most Shakespearian. His genius was not only influenced by its contact with one side of Shakespeare's many-sided mind, but the tragedies we have been con- sidering abound in expressions and situations either suggested by or directly copied from the tragedies of him he took for his model. Yet he seems to have had no conception of the superiority of Shakespeare to all other dramatists ; and in his Preface to The "White Devil, after speaking of the " full and heightened style of Master Chapman, the labored and understanding works of Master Jonson, the no less worthy composures of the both worthily excellent Master Beaumont and 148 MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. Master Fletcher," lie adds his approval, " without wrong last to be named," of "the right liappy and copious industry of Master Shakespeare, Master Dek- kar, and Master Heywood." This is not half so felici- tous a classification as would be made by a critic of our century, who should speak of the " right happy and copious industry " of Master Goethe, Master Dickens, and Master G. P. R. James. Webster's reference, however, to " the full and heightened style of Master Chapman " is more appro- priate ; for no writer of that age impresses us more by a certain rude heroic height of character than George Chapman. Born in 1559, and educated at the Univer- sity of Oxford, he seems, on his first entrance into London life, to have acquired the patronage of the noble, and the friendship of all who valued genius and scholarship. He was among the few men whom Ben Jonson said he loved. His greatest performance, and it was a gigantic one, was his translation of Homer, which, in spite of obvious faults, excels all other translations in the power to rouse and lift and inflame the mind. Some eminent painter, we believe Barry, said that, when he went into the street after reading it, men seemed ten feet high. Pope averred that the transla- tion of the Iliad might be supposed to have been written by Homer before he arrived at years of discretion ; and MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 149 Coleridge declares the version of the Odyssey to be a& truly an original poem as the Faery Queen. Chapman himself evidently thought that he was the first transla- tor who had been admitted into intimate relations with Homer's soul, and who had caught by direct contact the sacred fury of his inspiration. He says finely of those who had attempted the work in other languages : — " They failed to search his deep and treasurous heart. The cause was, since they wanted the fit key Of Nature, in tiieir downright strength of art, With Poesy to open Poesy." Chapman was also a voluminous dramatist, and of his many comedies and tragedies some sixteen were printed. It is to be feared that the last twenty years of his long and honorable life were passed in a desperate struggle for the means of subsistence. But his ideas of the dignity of his art were so inwoven into his character that he probably met calamity bravely. Poesy he early professed to prefer above all worldly wisdom, being composed, in his own words, of the " sinews and souls of all learning, wisdom, and trutli." " We have exam- ple sacred enough," he said, " that true Poesy's humil- ity, poverty, and contempt are badges of divinity, not vanity. Bray then, and bark against it, ye wolf-faced worldlings, that nothing but riches, honors, and magis- tracy " can content. " I (for my part) shall ever 150 MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. esteem it much more manly and sacred, in this harmless and pious study, to sit until I sink into my grave, than shine in your vainglorious bubbles and impieties ; all your poor policies, wisdoms, and their trappings, at no more valuing than a musty nut." These sentiments were probably fresh in his heart when, in 1634, friendless and poor, at the age of seventy-five, he died. Anthony Wood describes him as " a person of most reverend aspect, religious and temperate ; qualities," he spitefully adds, " rarely meeting in a poet." Chapman was a man with great elements in his nature, which were so imperfectly harmonized that what he was found but a stuttering expression in what he wrote and did. There were gaps in his mind; or, to use Victor Hugo's image, " his intellect was a book with some leaves torn out." His force, great as it was, was that of an Ajax, rather than that of an Achilles. Few dramatists of the time afford nobler passages of description and reflection. Few are wiser, deeper, manlier in their strain of thinking. But when we turn to the dramas from which these grand things have been detached, we find extravagance, confusion, huge thoughts lying in helpless heaps, sublimity in parts conducing to no general effect of sublimity, the movement lagging and unwieldy, and the plot urged on to the catastrophe by incoherent expedients. His MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 151 imagination partook of the incompleteness of his in- tellect. Strong enough to clothe the ideas and emotions of a common poet, it was plainly inadequate to embody the vast, half-formed conceptions which gasped for ex- pression in his soul in its moments of poetic exaltation. Often we feel his meaning, rather than apprehend it. The imagery has the indefiniteness of distant objects seen by moonlight. There are whole passages in his works in which he seems engaged in expressing Chap- paan to Chapman, like the deaf egotist who only placed his trumpet to his ear when he himself talked. This criticism applies more particularly to his trage- jlies, and to his expression of great sentiments and passions. His comedies, though over-informed with thought, reveal him to us as a singularly sharp, shrewd, and somewhat cynical observer, sparkling with worldly wisdom, and not deficient in airiness any more than wit. Hazlitt, we believe, was the first to notice that Monsieur D'Olive, in the comedy of that name, is " the undoubted prototype of that light, flippant, gay, and infinitely de- lightful class of character, of the professed men of wit and pleasure about town, which we have in such perfec- tion in Wycherley and Congreve, such as Sparkish, Wit- would, Petulant, &c., both in the sentiments and the style of writing " ; and Tharsalio in The Widow's Tears, and Ludovico in May-Day, have the hard im- 152 MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. pudence and cynical distrust of virtue, the arrogant and glorying self-M?2righteousness, that distinguish another class of characters which the dramatists of the age of Charles and Anne were unwearied in providing with insolence and repartees. Occasionally we have a jest which Falstaff would not disown. Thus in May-Day, when Cuthbert, a barber, approaches Quintiliano, to get, if possible, " certain odd crowns " the latter owes him, Quintiliano says, " I think thou 'rt newly mar- ried ? " "I am indeed, sir," is the reply. " I thought so ; keep on thy hat, man, 't will be the less perceived." Chapman, in his comedies generally, shows a kind of philosophical contempt for woman, as a frailer and flim- sier, if fairer, creature than man, and he sustains his bad judgment with infinite ingenuity of wilful wit and penetration of ungracious analysis. In The Widow's Tears this unpoetic infidelity to the sex pervades the whole plot and sentiments, as well as gives edge to many an incisive sarcasm. " My sense," says Tharsalio, " tells me how short-lived widows' tears are, that their weep- ing is in truth but laughing under a mask, that they mourn in their gowns and laugh in their sleeves ; all of which I believe as a Delphian oracle, and am re- solved to burn in that faith." " He," says Lodovico, in May -Day, — he " that holds religious and sacred thought of a woman, he that holds so reverent a respect MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 153 to her that he will not touch her but with a kist hand and a timorous heart, he that adores her Uke his god- dess, let him be sure she will shun him like her slave. .... Whereas nature made " women " but half fools, we make 'em all fool : and this is our palpable flattery of them, where they had rather have plain dealing." In all Chapman's comic writing there is something of Ben Jonson's mental self-assertion and disdainful glee in his own superiority to the weakness he satirizes. In passing from a comedy like May-Day to a tragedy like Bussy D'Ambois, we find some difficulty in recog- nizing the features of the same nature. Bussy D'Am- bois represents a mind not so much in creation as in eruption, belching forth smoke, ashes, and stones, no less than flame. Pope speaks of it as full of fustian ; but fustian is rant in the words when there is no corre- sponding rant in the soul, whilst Chapman's tragedy, like Marlowe's Tamburlaine, indicates a greater swell in the thoughts and passions of his characters than in their expression. The poetry is to Shakespeare's what gold ore is to gold. Veins and lumps of the precious metal gleam on the eye from the duller substance in which it is imbedded. Here are specimens : — " Man is a torch borne in the wind ; a dream But of a shadow, summed with all his substance ; And as great seamen, using all their wealth 7# 154 MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. And skills in Neptune's deep invisible paths, In tall ships richly built and ribbed with brass, To put a girdle round about the world, When they have done it (coming near their haven) Are fain to give a warning piece, and call A poor strayed fisherman, that never past His country's sight, to waft and guide them in: So when we wander furthest through the waves Of glassy glory and the gulfs of state, Topped with all titles, spreading all our reaches, As if each private arm would sphere the earth, We must to Virtue for her guide resort. Or we shall shipwreck in our safest port." "In a king All places are contained. His words and looks Are like the flashes and the bolts of Jove ; His deeds inimitable, like the sea That shuts still as it opes, and leaves no tracks. Nor prints of precedent for mean men''s acts^ " His great heart will not down : 't is like the sea, That partly by his own internal heat. Partly the stars' daily and nightly motion, Their heat and light, and partly of the place The divers frames, but chiefly by the moon Bristled with surges, never will be won, (No, not when th' hearts of all those powers are burst,^ To make retreat into his settled home, TiU he be crowned with his own quiet foam." " Now, all ye peaceful regents of the night, Silently gliding exhalations, MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. 155 Languishing winds, and murmuring falls of waters, Sadness of heart, and ominous secureness, Enchantments, dead sleeps, all the friends of rest That ever wrought upon the life of man Extend your utmost strengths ; and this charmed hour Fix like the centre." " There is One That wakes above, whose eye no sleep can bind: He sees through doors and darkness and our thoughts." " 0, the dangerous siege Sin lays about us ! and the tyranny fle exercises when he hath expugned : Like to the horror of a winter's thunder, Mixed with a gushing storm, that suffer nothing To stir abroad on earth but their own rages. Is sin, when it hath gathered head above us." " Terror of darkness ! thou king of flames ! That with thy music-footed horse doth strike The clear light out of crystal, on dark earth, And hurl'st instinctive fire about the world. Wake, wake, the drowsy and enchanted night. That sleeps with dead eyes in this heavy riddle : thou great prince of shades, where never sun Sticks his far-darted beams, whose eyes are made To shine in darkness, and see ever best Where men are blindest ! open now the heart Of thy abashed oracle, that for fear Of some ill it includes would feign lie hid, And rise thou with it in thy greater light." It is hardly possible to read Chapman's serious verse 156 MINOR ELIZABETHAN DRAMATISTS. without feeling that he had in him the elements of a great nature, and that he was a magnificent specimen of what is called " irregular genius." And one of his poems, the dedication of his translation of the Iliad to Prince Henry, is of so noble a strain, and from so high a mood, that, while borne along with its rapture, we are tempted to place him in the first rank of poets and of men. You can feel and hear the throbs of the grand old poet's heart in such lines as these : — *' 0, 't is wondi'ous mucli, Though nothing prized, that the right virtuous touch Of a -weU-written soul to virtue moves ; Nor have we souls to purpose, if their loves Of fitting objects be not so inflamed. How much were then this kingdom's main soul maimed, To want this great inflamer of aU powers That move in human souls. Through all the pomp of kingdoms still he shines, And graceth aU his gracers. A prince's statue, or in marble carved, Or steel, or gold, and shrined, to be preserved, Aloft on pillars and pyramides, Time into lowest ruins may depress ; But drawn with all Ms virtues in learned verse, Fame shall resound them on oblivion's hearse. Till graves gasp with their blasts, and dead men rise." BEAUMONT AND FLETCHEE, MASSIK- GEE, AND FOED. "TXTE have seen, in what has been already said of " ' the intellectual habits of the Elizabethan dram- atists, that it was a common practice for two, three, four, and sometimes five writers to co-operate in the production of one play. Thus Dekkar and Webster were partners in writing Northward Hoe ! and West- ward Hoe ! Ben Jonson, Marston, and Chapman in writing Eastward Hoe ! Drayton, Middleton, Dekkar, Webster, and Munday, in writing The Two Harpies. In the case of Webster and Dekkar, this union was evidently formed from a mutual belief that the som- bre mind of the one was unsuited to the treatment of certain scenes and characters which were exactly in harmony with the sunny genius of the other ; but the alliance was often brought about by the de- mand of theatre-managers for a new play at a short notice, in which case the dramatist who had the job hurriedly sketched the plan, and then applied to his brother playwrights to take shares in the enterprise, payable in daily or weekly instalments of mirth oi* 158 BEAUMONT AND FLETCHEE. passion. But there were two writers of the period, twins in genius, and bound together by more than brotherly affection, whose Uterary union was so much closer than the occasional combinations of other dram- atists, that it is now difficult to dissociate, in the public mind, Francis Beaumont from John Fletcher, or even to change the order of their names, though it can easily be proved that the firm of Beaumont and Fletcher owes by far the greater portion of its capital to the teeming brain of the second partner. The materials for their biographies are scanty. Beau- mont was the son of a judge, was born about the year 1586, resided a short period at Oxford, but left without taking a degree, and, at the age of fifteen, was entered a member of the Inner Temple. Fletcher, the son of the " courtly and comely " Bishop Fletcher, was born in December, 1579, and was educated at Cambridge, but seems to have been designed for no profession. At what time and under what circumstances the poets met we have no record. The probability is, that, as both were esteemed by Ben Jonson, it was he who brought them together. It is more than probable that Fletcher, the elder of the two, had written for the theatres before his acquaintance with Beaumont began ; and that in The Woman-Hater and in Thierry and Theodoret he had proved his ability both as a comic and as a tragic dra- BEAUMONT AND FLETCHEE. 159 matist before Beaumont had thought of dramatic compo- sition. When they did meet, they found, in Aubrey's words, a " wonderful consimility of phansy " between them, which resulted in an exceeding " dearnesse of friendship " ; and the old antiquary adds : " They lived together on the Banke side, not far from the playhouse, both bachelors, lay together," and " had the same cloths and cloak" between them. Their first joint composition was the tragi-comedy of Philaster, pro- duced about the year 1608 ; and we may suppose that this community of goods as well as thoughts continued until 1613, when Beaumont was married, and that the friendship remained unbroken till it was broken in 1616 by Beaumont's death. Fletcher lived until August, 1625, at which time he was suddenly cut off by the plague, in his forty-sixth year. In regard to the question as to Beaumont's share in the authorship of the fifty-two plays which go under the name of Beaumont and Fletcher, let us first quote the indignant doggerel which Sir Aston Cokaine ad- dressed to the publisher of the first edition, in 1647 : — " Beaumont of those many writ in few : And Massinger in other few : the main Being sole issues of sweet Fletcher's brain. But how came I, jon ask, so much to know ? Fletcher's chief bosom-friend informed me so." 160 BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER. This gives no information touching the special plays which Beaumont assisted in producing. None of them were published as joint productions during his life, and only three during the nine or ten years that Fletcher survived him. Of the fifty-two dramas in the collection, fifty were written in the eighteen years which elapsed between 1607 and 1625. During the first years of their partnership neither seemed to be dependent on the stage for support ; and it is almost cer- tain that Beaumont's income continued to be adequate to his wants, and that his pen was never spurred into action by poverty. The result was that the earlier dramas were composed more slowly and carefully than the later. A year elapsed between the production of their first joint play, Philaster, in 1608, and the Maid's Tragedy, in 1309. In 1610 Fletcher alone brought out The Faithful Shepherdess. In 1611, A King and No King and the Knight of the Burning Pestle were acted. These five dramas — one exclusively by Fletcher, the others joint productions — - are commonly ranked as their best works, and are considered to include all the capacities of their genius. If we suppose that after 1611 they wrote two plays a year, we have fifteen as the number produced up to the period of Beaumont's death, leaving thirty -five which were written by Fletcher alone in nine years. We do not think that BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER. 161 Beaumont's hand can be traced in more than fifteen of the plays, or that it is predominant in more than six. With individual differences as to mind and tempera- ment, these dramatists had some general characteristics in common. They agreed in being tainted with the fashionable slavishness and fashionable immorahty of the court of James. They believed in the divine right of kings as piously as any bishop, and they violated all the decencies of life as recklessly as any courtier. The impurity of Beaumont, however, seems the result of elaborate thinking, that of Fletcher the running over of heedless animal spirits. They agreed also in certain leading dramatic conceptions and types of character; and they agreed, in regard to the morality of their plays, in subordinating their consciences to their au- diences. But the mind of Beaumont was as slow, solid, and painstaking as his associate's was rapid, mercurial, and inventive. The tradition runs that his chief busi- ness was to correct the overflowings of Fletcher's fancy, and hold its volatile creativeness in check, Everybody of that age commended his judgment, and even Ben Jonson is said to have consulted him in regard to his plots. The plays in which he had a main hand exhibit a firmer hold upon character, a more orderly disposition of the incidents, and greater symmetry in the construc- tion, than the others. His verse is also simpler, K 162 BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER. sweeter, more voluble, than Fletcher's, with few of the latter's double and triple endings and harsh pauses. Take, for example, the passage in which Philaster re- counts his meeting with Bellario : — " Hunting the buck, I found him sitting by a fountain's side, Of which he borrowed some to quench his thirst, And paid the nymph again as much in tears. A garland lay him by, made by himself Of many several flowers bred in the vale, Stuck in that mystic order that the rareness Delighted me ; but ever when he turned His tender eyes upon 'em he would weep. As if he meant to make 'em grow again." Now contrast this with a characteristic passage from t'letcher : — " All shall be right again ; and, as a pine, Bent from Oeta by a sweeping tempest. Jointed again, and made a mast, defies Those raging winds that split him ; so will I Pieced to my never-failing strength and fortune. Steer through these swelling dangers, plough their prides up, And bear like thunder through their loudest tempests." Beaumont also, though his general temperament was not so poetical as his partner's, had a vein of poetrj in him, which was superior in quality and depth to Fletcher's, though sooner exhausted. Beaumont, we BEAUMONT AND FLETCHEE. 163 think it was, who conceived that beautiful type of womanhood of which Bellario in Philaster, Panthea in A King and No King, and Viola in The Coxcomb, are perhaps the most exquisite embodiments, and which also appears, somewhat dissolved in sentimentality, in As- pasia in The Maid's Tragedy. It is true that Shake- speare had already represented this type of character with even more force and purity in his Viola ; but still Beaumont's mind appears to have penetrated to its ideal sources, and not to have copied from his greater con- temporary. Beaumont could only repeat it under other names, after its first embodiment in Bellario ; but it was too delicate and elusive for Fletcher even to repeat, and it never appears in the dramas he wrote after Beau- mont's death. Fletcher has given us many examples of womanly virtue, devotion, and heroism ; but he had a bad trick of disconnecting virtue from modesty, and the talk of his best and noblest women is often such as would scare womankind from any theatre of the present day. Beaumont alone could combine feminine inno- cence with feminine power, the most ethereal softness and sweetness with martyr-like heroism, knowledge of good with ignorance of evil, and invest the whole repre- sentation with a visionary charm, so that it affects us as Panthea did Arbaces : — 164 BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER. " She is not fair Nor beautiful ; these words express her not ; They say her looks have something excellent, That wants a name." Fletcher could not, we think, have written Bellario's account of her love for Philaster, as it runs in Beau- mont's limpid verse : — " My father oft would speak Your worth and virtue ; and as I did grow More and more apprehensive, I did thirst To see the man so praised. But yet all this Was but a maiden-longing, to be lost As soon as found ; tUl, sitting in my window, Printing my thoughts in lawn, I saw a god, I thought, (but it was you,) enter our gates; My blood flew out and back again, as fast As I had puffed it forth and sucked it in Like breath; then was I called away in haste To entertain you. Never was a man, Heaved from a sheep-cote to a sceptre, raised So high in thoughts as I. You left a kiss Upon these lips then, which I mean to keep From you forever ; I did hear you talk. Far above singing. After you were gone, I grew acquainted with my heart, and searched What stirred it so: alas, I found it love ! " With this superior fineness of perception, Beaumont also excelled his associate in solid humor. The chief proof of this is to be found in his delineations, in BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER. 165 The Knight of the Burning Pestle, of the London citi- zen and his wife. These have a geniality, richness, and raciness, a closeness to nature and to fact, unexcelled by any contemporary pictures of Elizabethan manners and character, not excepting even Ben Jonson's. A more extravagant, but hardly less delicious, example of Beau- mont's humor is his character of Bessus, in A King and No King, — a braggart whose cowardice is sustained by assurance so indomitable as to wear the aspect of cour- age ; one who is too base to feel insult, who cannot be kicked out of his chirping self-esteem, but presents as cheerful a countenance to infamy as to honor. After, however, awarding to Beaumont all that he can properly claim, he must still be placed below Fletcher, not merely in fertility, but in force and variety of genius. Of Fletcher, indeed, it is difficult to convey an adequate idea, without running into some of his own extrava- gance, and without quoting passages which would shock all modern notions of decency. He most assuredly was not a great man nor a great poet. He lacked serious- ness, depth, purpose, principle, imaginative closeness of conception, imaginative condensation of expression. He saw everything at one remove from its soul and essence, and must be ranked with poets of the second class. But no other poet ever had such furious animal spirits, a keener sense of enjoyment, a more perfect abandon* 166 BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER. ment to whatever was uppermost in his mind at the mo- ment. There w^as no conscience in his rakish and disso- lute nature. Nothing in him — wit, humor, fancy, appe- tite, sentiment, passion, knowledge of life, knowledge of books, all his good and all his bad thoughts — met any impediment of taste or principle when rushing into ex- pression. His eyes flash, his cheeks glow, as he writes ; his air is hurried and eager ; the blood that tingles and throbs in his veins flushes his words ; and will and judg- ment, taken captive, follow with reluctant steps and half- averted faces the perilous lead of the passions they should direct. As there was no reserve in him, there was no- reserved power. Rich as were the elements of his nature, they were never thoroughly organized in intellectual character ; and as no presiding personality regulated the activity of his mind, he seems hardly to be morally responsible for the excesses into which he was impelled. Composition, indeed, sets his brain in a whirl. He sometimes writes as if inspired by a satyr ; he sometimes writes as if inspired by a seraph ; but neither satyr nor seraph had any hold on his individual- ity, and neither could put fetters on his caprice. There is the same gusto in his indecencies as iiv his refine- ments. Though an Englishman, lie has no morality, except that morality which is connected with generous instincts, or which is awakened by th© sense of beauty. BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER. 167 Though the son of a bishop, he had no religion, except ihat religion which consists in an alternate worship of Venus, Bacchus, and Mars. An incurable mental and moral levity is the characteristic of his writings, — a levity which has its source in an intoxication of the soul through an excess of feeling and sensation, and which is moral or immoral, sentimental or sensual, ac- cording to the impulse or temptation of the moment. This giddiness of soul, in which decorum is ignored rather than denied, is most brilliantly and buoyantly exhibited in his comedies. In The Chances, The Span- ish Curate, The Custom of the Country, Rule a Wife and have a Wife, The Wild- Goose Chase, and especially in Monsieur Thomas and The Little French Lawyer, we see the comic muse emancipated from all restraint, — loose, free-spoken, sportive, sparkling, indeed almost madly merry. It is not so much any quotable speci- mens of wit and humor as it is the all-animating spirit of frolic and mischief, which gives to these comedies their droll, equivocal power to please. In Fletcher's serious plays the same levity is displayed in pushing sentiment and passion altogether beyond the bounds of character ; and the volatile fancy which, in his comedy, riots in fun, in his tragedy riots in blood. What lifts botli into a poetic region is the tone of romantic heroism by which they are almost equally characterized. His 168 BEAUMONT AND FLETCHEE. coxcombs and profligates, as well as his conquerors and heroes, are all intrepid. They do not rate their lives at a pin's fee, — the first in comparison with the gratifica- tion of a passing desire or caprice ; the second, in com- parison with glory and honor. The peculiar life, in- deed, of Fletcher's characters consists in their being careless of life. Wholly absorbed in the feeling or object of the instant, their action is ecstatic action, and flashes on us in a succession of poetic surprises. This is the great charm of Fletcher's plays ; this gilds their grossness, and has kept them alive. You find it in his Monsieur Thomas as well as in his delineation of Caesar. All the comic characters profess a sportive contempt for consequences, and startle us with unexpected audacities. Fear of disease, danger, or death never dissuades them from the rollicking action or expression of eccentricity and vice. Their concern is only for the free, wild, reck- less whim of the moment. Thus, in the play of The Sea Voyage, Julietta, enraged at the jeers of Tibalt and the master of the ship, exclaims : — " Why, slaves, 't is in our power to hang ye ! " " Very likely," retorts the jovial Master, — " 'T is in our powers then to be hanged, and scorn ye ! " This heroism of the blood, when it passes from an BEAUMONT AND FLETCHEE. 169 instinct into some semblance of a 23rinci]3le, adopts the chivalrous guise of honor. Honor, in Fletcher's ethical code, is the only possible and admissible restraint on appetite and passion. Thus in the drama of The Cap- tain, Julio, infatuated with the wicked Lelia, thinks of marrying her, and confesses to his friend Angelo that her bewitching and bewildering beauty has entirely mastered him. "When she speaks, he says : — " Then music ( Such as old Oipheus made, that gave a soul To aged mountains, and made rugged beasts Lay by their rages ; and tall trees, that knew No sound but tempests, to bow down their branches, And hear, and wonder ; and the sea, whose surges Shook their white heads in heaven, to be as midnight Still and attentive) steals into our souls So suddenly and strangely, that we are From that time no more ours, but what she pleases ! " Angelo admits the temptation, says he would be will- ing himself to sacrifice all his possessions, even his soul, to obtain her, but then adds : — " Yet methinks we should not dole away That that is something more than ours, our honors ; I would not have thee marry her by no means." Again : Curio, in Love's Cure, when threatened by his mistress with the loss of her affection if he fights with her brother, replies that he would willingly give 8 170 BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER. his life, " rip every vein," to please her, yet still insists on his purpose. " Life is but a word, a shadow, a melting dream, Compared with essential and eternal honor." In the plays of The Mad Lover, The Loyal Subject, Bonduca, and The False One, Fletcher attempts to por- tray this heroic element, not as a mere flash of cour- ageous inspiration, but as a solid element of character. He strains his mind to the utmost, but the strain is too apparent. There is no calm, strong grasp of the theme. His heroes are generally too fond of vaunting them- selves, too declamatory, too screechy, too much like embodied speeches. In his own words, they carry " a drum in their mouths " ; and what they say of them- selves would more properly and naturally come from others. Thus Memnon, in The Mad Lover, tells his prince, in apology for his roughness of behavior : — " I know no court but martial. No oily language but the shock of arms, No dalliance but with death, no lofty measures But weary and sad marches, cold and hunger, 'Larums at midnight Valor's self would shake at 5 Yet I ne'er shrunk. Balls of consuming wildfire, That licked men up like lightning, have I laughed at, And tossed 'em back again, like children's trifles. Upon the edges of my enemies' swords I have marched like whirlwinds, Fury at this hand waiting, BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER. 171 Death at my right, Fortune my forlorn hope : When I have grappled with Destruction, And tugged with pale-faced Ruin, Night and Mischief Frighted to see a new day break in blood." This is talk on stilts ; but it is still resounding talk, full of ardor and the impatient consciousness of personal prowess. In the characterization of Coesar in The False One, the same feeling of individual supremacy is combined with a haughtier self-possession, as befits a mightier and more imperial soul. We feel, through- out this play, that there is power in the mere presence of Caesar, and that his words derive their force from his character. The very minds and hearts of the Egyp- tians crouch before him. He sways by disdaining them ; even his clemency is allied to scorn. " You have found," he says, — " You have found me merciful in arguing with ye ; Swords, hungers, fires, destruction of all natures, Demoiishment of kingdoms, and whole ruins, Are wont to be my orators." When they bring him the head of Pompey, whom they have slain for the purpose of propitiating him, his contempt for them breaks out in a noble tribute to his great enemy. " Egyptians, dare ye think your highest pyramids, Built to out-dure the sun, as you suppose, 172 BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER. Where your unwortliy kings lie raked in ashes, Are monuments fit for him ? No, brood of Nilus, Nothing can cover his high fame but heaven, No pyramids set off his memories, But the eternal substance of his greatness ; To which I leave him." When he is besieged in the palace by the whole Egyptian army, he prepares, with his few followers, to cut his way to his ships. Septimius, a wretch who has been false to all parties, offers to show him safe means both of vengeance and escape. Caesar's reply is one of the finest things in Fletcher. " Caesar scorns To find his safety or revenge his wrongs So base a way, or owe the means of life To such a leprous traitor! I have towered For victory like a falcon in the clouds, Not digged for 't like a mole. Our swords and cause Make way for us : and that it may appear We took a noble course, and hate base treason, Some soldiers that would merit Csesar's favor Hang him on yonder turret, and then follow The lane this sword makes for you." But perhaps the play in which the heroic and martial spirit is most dominant is the tragedy of Bonduca ; and the address of Suetonius, the Roman general, to his troops, as they prepare to close in battle with the Brit- ons, is in Fletcher's noblest vein of manliness and imagi- nation. BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER 173 " And, gentlemen, to you now: To bid you fight is needless; ye are Eomans, The name will fight itself. Go on in full assurance : draw your swords As daring and as confident as justice ; The gods of Eome fight for ye ; loud Fame calls ye, ^ Pitched on the topless Apennine, and blows To all the under- world, all nations, the seas, And unfrequented deserts where the snow dwells | Wakens the ruined monuments ; and there, Where nothing but eternal death and sleep is. Informs again the dead bones with your virtues. Go on, I say ; valiant and wise rule heaven, And all the great aspects attend 'em. Do but blow Upon this enemy, who, but that we want foes, Cannot deserve that name ; and like a mist, A lazy fog, before your burning valors You '11 find him fly to nothing. This is all. We have swords, and are the sons of ancient Eomans, Heirs to their endless valors: fight and conquer! " The maxim here laid down, that " Valiant and wise rule heaven," is much better, or worse, than Napoleon's, that " Providence is always on the side of the heaviest battalions." It might be supposed that the extreme susceptibility of Fletcher — the openness of his nature to all impressions, ludicrous, romantic, heroic, or indecent — would have made him a great delineator of the varieties of life and character. But the truth is, it made him versatile with* 174 BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER. out making him universal. He wrote a greater num- ber of plays than Shakespeare, and he has between five and six hundred names of characters ; but two or three plays of Shakespeare cover a wider extent of human life than all of Fletcher's. To compare them is like comparing a planet with a comet, — a comet whose nucleus is only a few hundred miles in diameter, though its nebulous appendage flames millions of leagues be- hind. Fletcher's susceptibility to the surfaces of things was almost unlimited ; his vital sympathy and inward vision were confined to a few kinds of character and a few aspects of life. His variety is not variety of char- acter, but variety of incident and circumstance. He contrives rather than creates ; and his contrivances, ingenious and exhilarating as they are, cannot hide his constant repetition of a few types of human nature. These types he conceived by a process essentially differ- ent from Shakespeare's. Shakespeare individualized classes ; Fletcher generalized individuals. One of Shakespeare's characters includes a whole body of per- sons ; one of Fletcher's is simply an idealized individ- ual, and that often an exceptional individual. This individual, repeated in play after play, never covers so large a portion of humanity as Shakespeare's individual- ized class, which he disdains to repeat. But, more than this, the very faculties of Fletcher, — his wit, humor, BEAUMONT AND FLETCHEE. 175 understanding, fancy, imagination, — though we call them by the same words we use in naming Shake- speare's, differ from Shakespeare's both in kind and degree. Shakespeare was a great and comprehensive man, whose faculties all partook of his general greatness. The man Fletcher was so much smaller and narrower, and the materials on which his faculties worked so much more limited, that we are fooled by words if, following the example of his contemporaries, we place any one of his qualities or faculties above or on a level with Shakespeare's. Keeping, then, in view the fact that the man is the measure of the poet, let us glance for a moment at Fletcher's poetic faculty as distinguished from his dra- matic. As a poet he is best judged, perhaps, by his pastoral tragi-comedy of The Faithful Shepherdess, the most elaborate and one of the earliest of his works. It failed on the stage, being, in his own phrase, " hissed to ashes " ; but the merits which the many-headed mon- ster of the pit could not discern so enchanted Milton that they were vividly in his memory when he wrote Comus. The melody, the romantic sweetness of fan- cy, the luxuriant and luxurious descriptions of nature, and the true lyric inspiration, of large portions of this drama, are not more striking than the deliberate desecra- 176 BEAUMONT AND FLETCHEE. tion of its beauty by the introduction of impure senti- ments and images. The hoof-prints of unclean beasts are visible all over Fletcher's pastoral paradise ; and they are there by design. Why they are there is a question which can be answered only by pointing out the primal defect of Fletcher's mind, which was an incapacity to conceive or represent goodness and inno- cence except as the ideal opposites of evil and depravity. He took depravity as the positive fact of life, and then framed from fancy a kind of goodness out of its nega- tion. The result is, that, in the case of The Faithful Shepherdess, Chloe and the Sullen Shepherd, the de- praved characters of the play, are the most natural and lifelike, while there is a sickliness and unreality in the very virtue of Amoret. It is not, therefore, as some critics suppose, the mere admission of vicious charac- ters into the play that gives it its taint. Milton, whose conceptions both of good and evil were positive, and who represented them in their right spiritual relations, en' tirely avoided this error in Comus, while he availed himself of much in The Faithful Shepherdess that is excellent. In Comus it is virtue which seems most real and permanent, and the vice and wickedness represented in it do not mar the general impression of moral beauty left by the whole poem. But Fletcher, having no posi- tive imaginative conception of the good, and feeling for BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER. 177