010 072 306 2 111 HoUinger Corp. pH 8.5 IpR 658 07 W3 I Copy 1 THE ORIENTAL IN ELIZABETHAN DRAMA LOUIS WANN UNIV y OF ;oi\ism Reprinted for private circulation, from MoDKRN Philology, Vol. Xll, No. 7, January 1915 ^. of i>. JAN 10 1920 THE ORIENTAL IN ELIZABETHAN DRAMA The purpose of the study whose results I propose to outline in the following paper has been threefold. I have endeavored : First, to bring together a corpus of Elizabethan plays dealing with oriental matter. I have restricted my study to those plays produced from 1558 to 1642, in which the events portrayed take place or could take place since the rise of the Ottoman empire in the thirteenth century. Furthermore, I have included only those plays in which at least one Oriental appears in the dramatis personae. I have also taken account of both extant and non-extant plays, out of regard for the light which the latter throw on the subjects and general nature of these oriental plays and as an indicator of the inter- est taken by Elizabethans in the Orient. Secondly, to make an analysis of the plays thus collected, on the basis of: (1) types of plays; (2) sources; (3) scenes of action; (4) nationalities represented; (5) customs depicted. Thirdly, with this corpus as a basis and this analysis as a guide, aided also by an examination of the political situation in Europe and the relations between the English and the Orientals, to deter- mine how extensive and how accurate was the knowledge of the Elizabethans regarding the Orient. I. CORPUS OF PLAYS Following is the body of plays which I have considered in this study. They are arranged in chronological order, according to the most probable date of first production or writing. The titles itali- cized indicate non-extant plays. I have given in every case what information is ascertainable in regard to: (1) title; (2) type of play; (3) author; (4) general source employed; (5) source employed for the oriental matter. " Un. " indicates unknown. It will be noticed that the general source by no means corresponds necessarily with the oriental source. 423] 163 [MoDEEN Philology, January, 1915 164 Louis Wann 1. 1579 2. 1580 3. 1581 4. 1586 5. 1587 6. 1587 7. 1588 8. 1588. 9. ca. 1588. 10. ca. 1588. 11. ca. 1589. 12. 1589. 13. ca. 1590. 14. 1591. 15. ca. 1593. 16. 1594. 17. 1594. 18. 1596. 19. 1597. 20. 1598. 21. 1600. Conq. O. S. 0. S. G. S. List of Plays The Blacksmith's Daughter. Com. of travel. Auth. un. G. S. un. 0. S. un. The History of the Soldan and the Duke of . Type un. Auth. un. G. S. un. 0. S. un. Solyniannidae. Lat. trag. of palace intrigue. Auth. un. G. S. Georgievitz ( ?). 0. S. same ( ?). Brit. Mus. MS. The Spanish Tragedy. Trag. Auth. T. Kyd. G. S. un. O. S. Wotton. Tamburlaine the Great, L Conq. play. Auth. C. Marlowe. G. S. Fortescue, Perondinus. 0. S. same. Tamburlaine the Great, 11. Same as L Soliman and Perseda. Trag. Auth. T. Kyd (?). G. S. Wotton. 0. S. same. The First Part of the Tragical Reign of Selimus. play. Auth. R. Greene (?). G. S. Paulus Jovius. same. Tamber Cam, I. Conq. play. Auth. un. G. S. un. un. Plot extant. Tamber Cam, II. Same as I. The Rich Jew of Malta. Trag. Auth. C. Marlowe. un. O. S. un. Alphonsus, King of Aragon. T. C. Auth. R. Greene. G. S. Facio (likely). O. S. un. Lust's Dominion. Trag. Auth. un. G. S. un. 0. S. un. The Battle of Alcazar. Trag. Auth. G. Peele. G. S. Frigius. O. S. same. The True History of George Scanderbeg. Conq. play. Auth. C. Marlowe ( ?). G. S. un. 0. S. un. The Merchant of Venice. Com. Auth. W. Shakspere. G. S. Fiorentino, Gesta Romanorum, etc. 0. S. un. The Turkish Mahomet and Hiren the Fair Greek. Trag. (?). Auth. G. Peele. G. S. un. O. S. un. The Famous History of Captain Thomas Stukeley. Biog. Chron. Auth. un. G. S. other plays, ballads, Frigius. 0. S. same. Frederick and Basilea. Rom. drama (?). un. 0. S. un. Plot extant. Vayvode. Type un. Auth. H. Chettle. un. The Spanish Moor's Tragedy. Trag. Haughton, Day. 0. S. same(?). Auth. un. G. S. G. S. un. 0. S. Auth. Dekker, G. S. pamphlet (?), older play (?). 424 22. ca. 1600. 23. 1601. 24. 1602. The Oriental in Elizabethan Drama 165 Alaham. Senecan Trag. Auth. F. Greville. G. S. un. 0. S. un. Mahomet. Conq. play ( ?). Auth. un. G. S. un. 0. S. un. A "Comedy" (on the capture of Stuhlweissenburg by the Turks). Com. (?). Auth. un. G. S. un. 0. S. un. 25. 1602. Zulziman. Conq. play (?). Auth. un. G. S. un. 0. S. un. 26. 1603. Tomumbeius sive Sultanici in Aegypto Imperii Eversio. Lat. conq. play. Auth. G. Salterne. G. S. un. 0. S. un. 27. 1604. The Tragedy of Othello, the Moor of Venice. Trag. Auth. W. Shakspere. G. S. Cinthio. O. S. same. 28. 1605. Masque of Moors. Masque (?). Auth. un. G. S. un. 0. S. un. 29. 1606. Mustapha. Trag. Auth. F. Greville. G. S. Georgie- vitz(?). 0. S. same(?). 30. 1607. MuUeasses, the Turk. Trag. Auth. J. Mason. G. S. un. O. S. un. 31. 1607. The Travails of Three English Brothers. Chron. of adven- ture. Auth. Day, W. Rowley, Wilkins. G. S. Nixon. O. S. same. 32. 1610. A Christian Turned Turk, or the Tragical Lives of Two Famous Pirates, Ward and Dansiker. Play of adventure. Auth. R. Daborne. G. S. pamphlets, ballads. 0. S. same. 33. ca. 1610. The Fair Maid of the West, or a Girl Worth Gold,i I. Com. of travel. Auth. T. Heywood. G. S. un. 0. S. un. 34. ca. 1610. The Fair Maid of the West, or a Girl Worth Gold,i II. Same as I. 35. 1611. The White Devil, or Vittoria Corombona. Trag. Auth. J. Webster. G. S. un. 0. S. un. 36. 1619. The Knight of Malta. T. C. Auth. (Beaumont and) Fletcher, Massinger, Field (?). G. S. Bandello, Boccaccio. 0. S. BandeUo. 37. 1624. Revenge for Honor. Trag. Auth. H. Glapthorne. G. S. Knolles. 0. S. same. 38. 1624. The City Nightcap. T. C. Auth. R. Davenport. G. S. other plays ( ?). O. S. same ( ?). 39. 1624. The Renegado. T. C. Auth. P. Massinger. G. S. Cer- vantes. 0. S. same. 40. ca. 1627. The Courageous Turk, or Amurath I. Trag. Auth. T. Goffe. G. S. KnoUes. O. S. same. 1 As scholars do not agree as to the date of these plays, ranging as they do from 1603 to 1622, I have placed them here as coming logically among the other plays of travel and adventure. 425 166 Louis Wann 41. ca. 1627. The Raging Turk, or Bajazet II. Trag. Auth. T. Goffe. G. S. Knolles. 0. S. same. 42. 1638. Osmond, the Great Turk or the Noble Servant. Trag. Auth. L. Carlell. G. S. Knolles. 0. S. same. 43. 1638. The Fool Would Be a Favourite, or the Discreet Lover. T. C. Auth. L. Carlell. G. S. un. O. S. un. 44. 1639. The Rebellion. Trag. Auth. T. RawUns. G. S. un. O. S. un. 45. ca. 1642. Mirza. Trag. Auth. R. Baron. G. S. Herbert, corre- spondence (?). O. S. Herbert, correspondence (?). 46. ca. 1642. The Sophy. Trag. Auth. J. Denham. G. S. Herbert. O. S. same. 47. un. Antonio of Ragusa.^ Hist. (?). Auth. im. G. S. un. 0. S. un. Bodl. MS. We have, then, a body of 47 plays, 13 of which are non-extant. They cover the period from 1579, the date of the first known play dealing with oriental matter, to 1642, the date of the closing of the theaters. On examination, it will be seen that the 47 plays of this period of 63 years fall, rather roughly, into four groups, separated by intervals of years when no plays of the kind were produced. These chronological groups are as follows : I. 1579-1581 3 years 3 plays. II. 1586-1611 25 years 32 plays. III. 1619-1627 8 years 6 plays. IV. 1638-1642 4 years 5 plays. Date unknown Antonio of Ragusa. Group II is clearly the main one. In this period of 25 years, containing nowhere intervals of more than 2 years, 32 plays were produced. It is in this period that the interest of the Elizabethans in the presentation of oriental characters, life, history, and customs was strongest. While of no great significance, is not this fact of some interest when taken in connection with the state of English drama in general during this period ? It was, roughly speaking, this same period, from 1586 to 1611, that saw the greatest activity in the I While the exact date of this play is unknown, Schelling includes it in his list of Elizabethan plays. See Falconer Madan, A Summary Catalogue of Western MSS in the Bodleian Library at Oxford, III, 301, where the words "second half of the eighteenth century" are evidently a misprint for "second half of the sixteenth century." 426 The Oriental in Elizabethan Drama 167 Elizabethan drama at large. By far the greater part of the entire body of plays produced during the 85 years from 1558 to 1642 appeared within these 25 years. Not only that, but practically all the vital stages in the development of Elizabethan drama, from its rise under Marlowe and Kyd to its perfection under Shakspere, are here seen. In fact, the very first play on our list of this period, The Spanish Tragedy of Thomas Kyd, may in a sense be taken as the starting-point, not only of the drama dealing with the Orient, but of the whole body of Elizabethan drama, as first fashioned in the school of Kyd, Marlowe, Greene, and Peele. And if such com- paratively crude plays as The Spanish Tragedy, Soliman and Per- seda, and Tamhurlaine mark not only the beginning in oriental plays, but in the drama as a whole, we have fifteen or twenty years later the masterpiece of Othello, in which the central figure is an Oriental, and the dramatic art of which is as far removed from that of the three plays mentioned as is the noble Othello from the despicable Moor of this same author's Titus Andronicus. When, again, we consider the authors of these oriental plays, we find that a goodly number of the important playwrights of the period were attracted to oriental matter. In this period of twenty-five years we find represented Kyd, Marlowe, Greene, Peele, Shakspere, Dekker, Day, Greville, Hey wood, and Webster. Extending our examination to the end of the Elizabethan period, we can add the names of Fletcher, Massinger, Glapthorne, Carlell, and Denham. With the plays of the period distributed thus widely among the important playwrights of the time, we are justified in the assertion that the production of oriental plays was not due to the fancy of any one author or group of authors, but that the interest of the Elizabethans was so considerable as to induce a majority of the main playwrights to write at least one play dealing with oriental matter. II. analysis of plays We now come to an analysis of the plays themselves. First, we shall consider the types into which these plays fall. The following summary will give the broad types under which they may be classi- fied and the relative frequency of each type. 427 168 Louis Wann Summary A. Tragedies 19 B. Conqueror plays 9 C. Plays of travel and adventure 7 D. Tragi-comedies 5 E. Dramatic romances, etc 4 F. Type unknown 3 47 The first thing that strikes us in glancing at this summary is the great predominance of serious plays. The tragedies and conqueror plays in themselves number 28, and if we add 3 of the plays of travel and adventure, Stukeley, The Battle of Alcazar, and A Christian Turned Turk, which are also tragedies in a different form, we have 31 plays out of 47 which are essentially tragic in nature. Of the remaining third, 16 in number, 5 are tragi-comedies and 4 are plays of travel and adventure of a tragi-comic nature. Only 4 out of the whole number merit classification under the lighter head of dramatic romances, comedies, and masques. Even here, the tragi-comic ele- ment in The Merchant of Venice, the only extant play of the group, hardly justifies us in separating it from the other tragi-comedies. And while it is probable that the three non-extant plays of this group were really in a somewhat lighter vein than the average tragi- comedy, we know too little of them to justify us in concluding that we have here a group which, in any real sense, merits classification under the comic as opposed to the serious type of drama. Of three plays we know nothing of the type, though it is likely that Vayvode was a conqueror play or tragedy similar to Scanderbeg, treating of the long struggle between one of the Vayvodes of Wallachia and the Ottoman Turks. Two-thirds of all these oriental plays, then, are tragic in nature. And of the remaining 16 plays, at least 9 are tragi-comic. Even accepting the 4 plays of the comic group as really comic in nature, we should have a miserably small representation. It is clear that there was something about the oriental matter dealt with which demanded serious treatment. Perhaps this was to be expected when we consider the probable conception which the Elizabethans had of the Orient as the domain where war, conquest, fratricide, 428 The Oriental in Elizabethan Drama 169 lust, and treachery had freer play than in the lands nearer home — a conception more or less justified by the actual facts. On the other hand, it may be due simply to the fact that the EHzabethans, like all other peoples before and since, not only interested themselves to a greater extent in the more serious because the more striking aspects in the affairs of foreigners, but that they actually knew much more about the wars and conquests of the Orientals than about the less serious and more common affairs of these people. Whatever the cause, the fact remains: the Elizabethan plays dealing with oriental matter were predominantly serious in nature. 1. Types of plays. — -In regard to most of the types represented, little comment is required. It may be noticed, however, that with- out exception all of the plays dealing entirely with Orientals are either pure tragedies or conqueror plays. Those into which Orientals and Occidentals alike enter are for the most part tragi-comedies or plays of travel and adventure. These last form an interesting group. The first in point of time is The Blacksmith's Daughter, referred to in Gosson's School of Abuse (1579) as " containing the trechery of Turks, the honourable bounty e of a noble mind, the shining of vertue in distresse."* In Stukeley and The Battle of Alcazar, we have the glori- fication of an adventurous Englishman, who, after performing nu- merous exploits on land and sea, meets his death in northern Africa in the battle of Alcazar. Just as these two plays are founded on the facts of Stukeley's life, which terminated in 1578 in the historical battle of Alcazar, so all the rest of these plays of adventure are founded, more or less loosely, on current events. The Travails of Three English Brothers depicts the adventures of the Sherley brothers in Persia and is based on the highly colored narrative by Anthony Nixon which describes with much distortion of facts the actual expe- riences of Anthony, Robert, and Thomas Sherley at the Persian court and elsewhere. A Christian Turned Turk is one of those plays resulting from the popular interest in a number of daring sea rob- beries that occurred about 1609. This play, based on ballads and pamphlets of the moment, and a number of others served the function of modern newspapers and told the people all about these sensational events. The Fair Maid of the West is of the same nature. It breathes 1 p. 30 (in the Shakspere Society Pub., Vol. II). 429 170 Louis Wann of the very air of Plymouth and the salt sea, and the life of the sea- rover is made strikingly vivid. In all these plays there is rapid shifting of the scenes of action. Perhaps in no other type of play can we see so well the boundless energy and love of excitement that we always associate with the Elizabethans. 2. Sources of plays. — Before dealing with the sources of these particular plays, it may be well to take some notice of the entire body of sources that might have been utilized by the Elizabethan dramatist for the oriental matter of his play. Von Hammer in his Geschichte des osmanischen Reiches gives a " Verzeichniss der in Europa (ausser Constantinopel) erschienenen, osmanische Geschichte betref- fenden Werke."^ His complete list numbers 3,176 items. If we take only those likely to have been known to the Elizabethans — those printed between 1500 and 1640 — we have over 1,600 items. These are mostly histories, but include also ballads, poems, tracts, pamphlets, and stories. The majority are in Latin, but a great number are in German, French, Itahan, and Spanish, and some in English. The dramatist, then, had certainly no dearth of material which he could draw upon for the history, customs, and character of the Orientals. In fact, as Herford points out,^ the history of the Turks was a perfectly "safe" subject in every European book- market in the sixteenth century. The Ottoman empire was the mightiest in the world, and interest in the doings of the Turks was naturally intense. With these facts in mind, we shall not be inclined to regard a book dealing with the Orient as by any means an oddity and can see that the employment of such books as sources for plays was not only not an unusual thing, but a thing most naturally to be expected. Following is the list of sources used for oriental matter, arranged chronologically in the order in which they were first employed for particular plays. SouECEs Used for Oriental Matter 1. Georgievitz, Bartholomaeus. De Turcarum Moribus, ca. 1481. (a) Solyrnannidae, 1581. (6) Mustapha, 1606. ■ Joseph von Hammer, Geschichte des osmanischen Reiches (Pest, 1827), Vol. X. - The Literary Relations of England and Germany in the Sixteenth Century, p. 168. 430 The Oriental in Elizabethan Drama 171 2. Wotton, Henry. Courtlie Controversie of Cupids Cautels, 1578. | (a) The Spanish Tragedy, 1586.^ j (6) Soliman and Perseda, 1588.^ 3. Fortescue, Thomas. The Foreste or Collection of Histories .... dooen out of Frenche into Englishe, etc., 1571. (a) Tamburlaine, I and II, 1587. [ 4. Perondinus, Peter. Magni Tamerlanis Scytharum Imperatoris Vita, j etc., 1553. \ (a) Tamburlaine, I and II, 1587. 5. Jovius, Paulus. Rerum Turcicorum Commentariv^, etc., ca. 1550. (a) Selimus, 1588.^ 6. Frigius, John Thomas. Historia de Bello Africano, etc., 1580. (a) Battle of Alcazar, 1591. (6) Stukeley, 1596. 7. Other Plays. (a) Stukeley, 1596. - ' (6) The City Nightcap, 1624. 8. Ballads. (a) Stukeley, 1596. (&) A Christian Turned Turk, 1610.' 9. Cinthio, Jiovanni Battista Giraldi. Gli Hecatommithi, 1565. (a) Oi/ie^to, 1604. 10. Nixon, Anthony. (A pamphlet describing the travels of the Sherley j brothers, title not ascertained), 1607. (a) Travails of Three English Brothers, 1607. 11. Pamphlets (miscellaneous). ! (o) A Christian Turned Turk, 1610.' | 12. Bandello, Matteo. Novelle, 1554. i (a) The Knight of Malta, 1619." ' ! 13. Knolles, Richard. The Generall Historic of the Turkes from the first beginning, etc., 1603. i (a) Revenge for Honour, 1624. , ; (6) T/te Courageous Txirk, 1627. (c) r/ie /^agfm^ Twr^-, 1627. • j {d) Osmond, 1638. ] 14. Cervantes, Miguel de. (1) Comedia de los Banos de Argel, about 1585, i and (2) Don Quijote de la Mancha, 1605. (a) The Renegado, 1624.^ ' 1 See Gregor Sarrazin, Thomas Kyd und sein Kreis (1892). 2 See Hugo Gilbert, Robert Vreene's Selimus (Kiel, 1899). 3 See A. E. H. Swaen, "Robert Dabome's Plays," Anglia, Vol. XX. 4 See Erich Bliihin, Uber " The Knight of Malta" und seine Quellen (Halle, 1903). { 5 See Theodor Heckmann, Massinger's " The Renegado" und seine spanischen Quellen | (HaUe-Wittenberg, 1905). 431 I 172 Louis Wann 15. Herbert, Sir Thomas. Some Years Travels into Divers Parts of Africa and Asia the Great, etc., 1638. (a) Mirza, 1642. (6) The Sophy, 1642. 16. Correspondence (of an ambassador of Charles I at the Persian court to friends at Cambridge). (a) Mirza, 1642. We have here the sources for the oriental matter employed in 22 of the 47 plays. The sources for the remaining 25 are not yet ascertained. However, 13 of these 25 are non-extant, so that we lack the sources of only 12 extant plays. Among the chief of these are The Jew of Malta, Alaham, Tomumheius, and The Fair Maid of the West. What investigation I have been able to make regarding these plays has thrown no definite light on the question of their sources. It will be seen from this list that in the majority of cases histories were the sources employed. Out of 27 instances enumerated show- ing the employment of some source, 15 point to the use of histories. In 7 cases these histories were in Latin, and they were all used com- paratively early. No Latin source has been proved to have been used for a play written since 1606. The English histories, on the other hand, were all employed long after 1606, with the single excep- tion of Fortescue's work, which is itself a translation from the French. Of the Latin histories, Georgievitz, Frigius, and Perondinus were each used twice. Of the English historians, Knolles was used 4 times, Herbert twice, and Fortescue twice. It is surprising to find that Knolles was not oftener used, especially in view of the fre- quently met assertion on the part of scholars and historians of the drama that Knolles was the common source for plays dealing with oriental matter. Professor Schelling's statement that "the general source for English dramatists dealing with the history of the Otto- man Empire is Knolles' s General History of the Turks, 1603"^ is cer- tainly inaccurate, in view of the fact that of the dozen or so plays that can properly be construed as dealing with the history of the Ottoman empire, 6 were written before Knolles's history came out, and only 4 of the entire number point unmistakably to this as a source. ' Elizabethan Drama, II, 496. 432 The Oriental in Elizabethan Drama 173 Next in importance to histories come stories. But we tiave only 5 definite instances of their use: Wotton was used twice, Cinthio, Bandello, and Cervantes once each. It is not unlikely that stories may have been the material employed in some of those plays whose sources are not known, as for example The Jew of Malta, Alaham, and Mulleasses, though I am more inclined to think that MuUeasses and Alaham are the results of a rather grave distortion by the dramatists themselves of events recorded in histories. Plays are used twice, ballads twice, pamphlets twice, and correspondence once. This completes the list of the positively known sources. Only one inference of any definiteness can be drawn therefrom: that his- tory of some kind was very largely the storehouse for the oriental matter in these plays. And while ballads, stories, and pamphlets were also used to some extent, it is quite probable that if we knew the sources of the remaining 25 plays, we should find them to have been in large measure these same or similar histories, if for no other reason than that many of them are concerned with precisely the same subjects treated in the plays we know to have been thus derived. Accuracy of sources: We come now to the question of the reli- ability of the sources used. For if we are eventually to determine the extent and accuracy of the Elizabethan's knowledge of the Orient as exhibited in these plays, we must know, in addition to the knowl- edge he acquired otherwise, not only the sources employed, but how closely these sources were followed, and how accurate they were. Some of these sources we know. As to the closeness with which they were followed, little need be said, as it is clear that in the great majority of cases, the dramatist has adhered faithfully to the account of the historian, story-teller, or pamphleteer. Tamburlaine is a good example of this, showing, both in the description of Tambur- laine himself taken from the Latin of Perondinus and in the sequence of events as taken from Fortescue, how closely Marlowe adhered to his sources. In Osmond and Revenge for Honor, to be sure, the dramatist takes liberties with his material. But these plays, unHke Mustapha and Solymannidae, which use the same material, do not pretend to be historical, and the dramatist cannot be called to account for failing to give us the story, when all he intended was to give us a story. With these and other minor exceptions, as in both 433 174 Louis Wann Goffe's Turkish plays for example, we can credit the Elizabethan dramatist with following with tolerable faithfulness the materials he used. It is now necessary to determine in how far these sources, thus faithfully followed, present an accurate account of the history or a truthful picture of the customs and character of the oriental peoples. We shall leave out of account the stories and ballads, which from their nature are not amenable to criticism from the standpoint of fact, however much we may ask them to present the essential truth, which as a rule they do. We shall consider, then, the histories, which were used in the majority of cases as sources for these plays. Needless to say, history was not then written in the scientific spirit. Each historian copied from his predecessor, with or without acknowledgment, and felt no compunction in coloring the narrative to increase its interest, or in mingling legend with fact, with the result that his successor honestly accepted the whole as fact and so trans- mitted it to his successor with his own embellishments. And while it is true that, especially among the writers nearest the scene of action in time or place, the essential truth of the narrative is rarely lost sight of, it was inevitable that later writers, who were more and more distant from the time and place of the events described, should lose the sense of proportion, elevate legends to the rank of facts, and so give to the whole story the tinge of romantic untruth. Many examples might be cited in illustration of this phenomenon. But three instances will suffice — the stories of '•' 'jTj^e Murder of Mus- tapha," "Mahomet and Hiren the Fair Greek," "Bajazet and the Iron Cage." The first of these stories is the basis of the main plot ui three pi:i,ys: Solymannidae, Mustapha, and Revenge for Honor; while it also enters prominently into two others: Alaham and Osmond. The plain facts about this famous episode, as given by von Hammer,^ are these. Prince Mustapha, the eldest son and heir-apparent to the throne of Suleiman the Great, was an extremely accomplished and noble prince, a successful soldier, and the hope of the empire. But Roxolana, Suleiman's Russian favorite in the harem, desired the succession for her own son Seliin. With the aid of the Grand Vezir Rustem Pasha, who had married her daughter, Roxolana 1 III, 317-18. 434: The Oriental in Elizabethan Drama 175 succeeded in convincing Suleiman that Mustapha was plotting his father's overthrow, relying on his universal popularity among the soldiers and people. Suleiman, pretending to make a campaign against the Persians, marched his army into Asia Minor to the province then governed by Mustapha who innocently went to meet his father at Eregli. Pitching his tent beside Suleiman's, the Prince went to the latter to pay his respects to his father. But on entering he found no one to greet him but the seven dread mutes, who at once strangled him. On hearing the news, Mustapha's younger brother Tchihanger, who had loved him devotedly, fell ill and died of grief. Now, to these plain facts as related by all Ottoman historians, the European historians have not only added many stories of attempts at poisoning, of secret letters, of Suleiman's urgent cries to the mutes to be swift in their work, and such other details as tend to augment Suleiman's crime, but they have even made the Sultan go on a pil- grimage to Jerusalem to expiate his crime, and, what is more important for us, have all agreed in reporting Tchihanger's death as due to suicide. This last particular is very important, as we shall see later in dealing with the customs of the Orientals, for, in addition to the fact that all 5 plays adopt many of the minor legendary accretions, 3 of them introduce quite prominently the suicide of Tchihanger, and the suicide of some character is a strong factor in all. Thus the dramatist, honestly following his source, has, not to mention minor inaccuracies, been led to portray Suleiman as a feelingless father and unreasonable tyrant, Tchihanger as a suicide, and Roxolana's daughter Carmena (in Mustapha) as a martyr to her love for her brother — all of which flatly contradicts the facts as related by all Ottoman historians and by von Hammer. The second story is that of " Mahomet and Hiren the Fair Greek," used as the basis of the main plot in Osmond, The Courageous Turk, and presumably in Peele's non-extant play of Mahomet and Hiren the Fair Greek. It is also the subject of Gilbert Swinhoe's The Unhappy Fair Irene (1658), of Charles Goring's Irene, or the Fair Greek (1708), and Dr. Johnson's Irene (1749).^ There is only one bare thread of a fact upon which the whole marvelous story has 1 See also the poem by William Barksted entitled "Hiren or the Fair Greke," pub- lished n 1611. 435 176 Louis Wann hung these several centuries. I shall give in translation von Ham- mer's account of the incident and its transformation into a story of tragic romance.^ After describing the capture of Euboea from the Venetians, July 12, 1470, by Mohammed II, von Hammer concludes: Mohammed, in order to revenge himself for the loss of 50,000 men, satis- fied his rage against the brave defenders of their fatherland by means of ingenious tortures. Some of the Venetians were impaled, some quartered^ some stoned; but the Greeks were led away as slaves, Paul Erizzo, as the ambassador of Calayrita and Leontari, was sawed in two, and his daughter, who did not show herself sufficiently yielding, was cut to pieces.^ Out of this incident has probably arisen the fable of Irene, which may well serve as material for an unhistorical tragedy (hke that of Johnson's), but deserves no place in history, least of all on the authority of a novelist like Bandello, whom the most recent editor of Leonardus of Chios, the Premonstratensian rEcuy, has not blushed in his notes to produce as an historical witness of this romantic episode.' Out of this mere incident in one of Mahomet's campaigns, which took place, not in Turkey but in Greece, not in 1453 but in 1470, has developed the romantic story of the capture of the beautiful slave Irene during the siege of Constantinople, Mahomet's enslavement to her charms, the consequent disaffection among the soldiers at their Sultan's indifference to war, the sacrifice of the Sultan's love in cutting off his favorite's head in the presence of his troops, and Mahomet's immediate declaration to forswear the pleasures of the harem and straightway to lead his army to the battlefield against the Christians. Such is substantially the story of Osmond and The Courageous Turk, and most likely of Peele's play also. ihe third story — that of "Bajazet and the Iron Cage," as seen in Tamburlaine, I — is perhaps the most interesting of all as showing what small errors on the part of historians can raise a mountain out < *■ -1 molehill. Von Hammer devotes considerable space to the examination of this "question of the iron cage." After describing the capture of Bajazet by Tamburlaine, the kindness with which he was treated by his captor, Bajazet's abortive attempt to escape 1 For further examples in German and French literatiu-e see Michael Stephen Ofte- ring. Die Geschichte der " Schonen Irene" in der modernen Litteratur (Wiirzblirg, 1897). 2 The italics are mine. ' II. 99-100, and note, p. 555. 436 The Oriental in Elizabethan Drama 177 through a tunnel in the ground, and the consequent necessity of keeping a closer guard on him, he says: During the day a more numerous guard surrounded him, and at night he was put in fetters. From this, and from a false interpretation of the Turkish word kafes, which signifies "cage" and also "latticed room" or "litter," is derived the fable of the iron cage, repeated for so long a time by all the European historians after the Byzantine Phranzes and the Syrian Arab-Schah.^ After passing in review all of the Ottoman historians, who naturally say nothing of an iron cage, he adds : This accords with the following words of Neschri [one of the oldest Ottoman historians]: "Timur had made a htter in which he (Bajazet) was carried, just as in a kafes between two horses." It is evidently in this wrongly interpreted passage that we must recognize the primitive origin of the whole fable, which, growing with time, has finished by making itself a place in history. Not only does kafes mean, as we have said, a cage, but this word designates even today any latticed apartment of the women and even the dwelhng of the Ottoman princes in the seraglio at Constantinople. Kafes is used also of the latticed litters in which the women of the harem are carried on journeys, and it is precisely in a vehicle of this sort that Bajazet was carried between two horses. Later some obscure Ottoman chroniclers, lovers of anecdotes, on the faith of a Syrian poetaster, transformed this htter into an iron cage.^ Such is the origin of the famous story of Bajazet's imprisonment in the iron cage which found place in all European histories, and which may be found illustrated, along with portraits of the sultans, in Lonicero's Chronicum Turcicorum.^ There is, of course, less foundation for the scene where Bajazet and his wife commit suicide by dashing their brains out against the bars of the cage. Bajazet died eight months after the battle in which he was taken prisoner, not by violence, but of a broken heart, unable to endure the ignominy of defeat.* Thus is exemplified the almost inevitable tendency of legend to be treated as fact, given historians of a not too nice conscience and a taste for the romantic. These are perhaps small matters and do not greatly affect the question of the knowledge of the Elizabethans > I, 317-18. 2 1, 319-20. ' Philippo Lonicero, Chronicum Turcicorum (Frankfort am Main, 1578), p. 12 B. * Ed. S. Creasy, History of the Ottoman Turks (1877), p. 49. 437 178 Louis Wann about the essential truth concerning the Orient. But it does show clearly that if Elizabethan dramatists erred in presenting false pictures of history or life, the blame was not theirs but that of the historians they followed. 3. Scenes of action. — Obviously of much less importance than the question just considered is that of the location of the action of these 47 plays. But it is not without some interest as a sort of visual- ization of the various peoples and lands that were presented to the Elizabethan audience. Needless to say, it is in many cases impossible definitely to localize the action, because of the shift from one land to another, from land to sea, and from continent to continent. In the following summary, therefore, I have been content to indicate the general locality of the main action of each play. Scenes op Action A. European Turkey 12 B. North Africa 6 C. Italy 6 D. Asia Minor 4 E. Persia 4 F. Spain 4 G. Malta 2 H. Cyprus 1. Rhodes J. Tartary K. Arabia L. Egypt 43 Scene unknown 4 47 Little comment is called for, as the table is self-explanatory. Two things, however, are worthy of notice: (1) that almost every country touching the Mediterranean is represented; and (2) that Turkey is the scene of more plays than any other land. Taken in connection with what follows and considered as an aid in the determi- nation of our conclusions, these two points are of some importance. 4. Nationalities represented. — The question now to be considered — the various peoples represented in these plays and the accuracy 438 The Oriental in Elizabethan Drama 179 of the characterization — is perhaps deserving of more attention than any other phase of this investigation. But the scope and difficulty of any satisfactory study of the question have precluded anything but a general survey of the field ; and I have been forced to base my conclusions mainly on the average student's knowledge of these peoples, supplemented by the additional knowledge I myself have acquired through a more or less intimate association with the present- day representatives of these same Orientals. In the following summary I have indicated the frequency with which these various nationalities occur in the 47 plays under con- sideration. Nationalities Represented Turks in 31 plays Westerners 27 Moors 18 Eastern Christians 12 Persians 8 Tartars 5 Jews 6 Arabs 4 Egyptians 4 As Turkey was the land represented most often as the scene of action, so the Turks are the people occurring most frequently as characters. In fact, they occur oftener than the Westerners them- selves — a fact more striking than appears at first sight; for the term Westerner includes all the Christian nationalities of Europe, whereas the Turk is only one of the half-dozen oriental races which figure in these plays. Clearly the interest in the Turks was stronger than in any other oriental race. The Moors come next and then the eastern Christians — rarely designated by race, but presumably Armenians, Greeks, Bulgarians, and so forth. The Persians, Tartars, Arabs, and Egyptians are much less prominent, owing not only to the less fre- quent contact of Westerners with these peoples, but also to the fact that they were much less "in the limelight" than their renowned neighbors, the Turks, and their coreligionists, the Moors. The Jews, of course, might occur in any play of most any character whatever. And now what is the picture given us by the dramatist of these various races? I shall give briefly and with as little taint of 439 180 Louis Wann prepossessed ideas as possible the impression I have received of each of these various nationalities through the reading of these plays. I shall there point out wherein it seems to me the dramatist's char- acterization does or does not conform to the probably true char- acterization. The Turks are generally represented as valiant, proud-spirited, and cruel. There is almost universal admiration for their valor, and I can think of no instance where they are considered in any marked degree deserving of contempt. The railing of avowed enemies, as that of Tamburlaine against Bajazet and the Turks, cannot of course be considered indicative of the general attitude toward them. Their pride of spirit is continually dwelt upon. Their cruelty is brought out more in their dealings with one another than in those with other peoples. This is shown most often in the introduction of parricide, especially fratricide — in the Mustapha plays, Soliman and Perseda, Selimus, and others. No particular color of face is noted — a fact which shows clearly that the dramatist distinguished sharply enough between the Turks and the Moors, as the color of the latter is almost invariably mentioned in a prominent way.^ In the matter of the portrayal of good and bad Turks, the count stands about even. We have such villains as Ithamore in The Jew of Malta and Mulleasses in the play of that name. But we also have the distinctly noble character of Osmond in Carlell's play, the illustrious prince Mustapha in all the plays dealing with this story, and such minor characters as Lucinda in The Knight of Malta. There seems to be no indication of a prejudice against the Turk, and the dramatist has not, there- fore, attempted deliberately to paint his worst side. As far as I can judge, he has given us a fairly accurate picture of the Turk of that time. It is true, of course, that the charge of cruelty against the Turk of today would be the grossest of libels, and there is scarcely any mention of that hospitality, patriarchal dignity and simplicity, and frank generosity that impress foreigners today as his most prominent qualities. But not only was the Turk most likely a different man at that time, but these simpler qualities would not be so easily known as his valor, pride, and cruelty. So it is more likely 1 Contrast this with the freauent occurrence of the black-faced "Turkish knight" in the English mummers' plays. See Camb. Hist, of Eng. Lit., V, 36. 440 The Oriental in Elizabethan Drama 181 than not that the Elizabethan characterization of the Turk of 1600 was an accurate one. The Moors are in some ways made similar to the Turks,, They . are almost always valiant and proud of spirit. But they differ in some ways also. They are more barbarous and distinctly lustful. We have only to think of Eleazar and Abdellah to get a distinct impression of their lustful leanings. But they are intelligent and masterful. And many are represented as exceedingly generous and noble. While Eleazar in Lust's Dominion, Zanche in The White Devil, and Abdellah in The Knight of Malta are shown as villains, yet who can doubt the nobility of Othello, in a less degree that of Joffer in The Fair Maid of the West, and also of Mullisheg in the same play ? ThgJVloors ai'e persistently described as very dark, and almost invariably no distinction seems to be made between the inhabitants of northern Africa and the Negro. Why this confusion was made is a puzzling question, since in other respects they seem to have char- acterized the Moors with a fair degree of accuracy. No doubt a little too much stress was laid on their lustful inclinations — they were, in a measure, made the scapegoat for the sins of all men, though there was of course more justification for it than in the case of some other oriental races. On the whole, they seem to have been less respected than the Turks, and this was probably a pretty just estimate. In distinction from the races just mentioned, the Elizabethans seem to have had very hazy ideas about the rest of the oriental nations. The Persians, Tartars, Arabs, and Egyptians might all have been cast in the same mold. Their morals are loose, and their monarchs are apt to be tyrannical. But there is not that definite- ness of characterization that we find in the case of the Turks and Moors. Tamburlaine, to be sure, is clearly drawn, but in almost every other case we feel that a complete shift of characters, say from Arabia to Persia, would not have called for a change in characteri- zation. On the score of indistinctness, then, these characters are certainly inaccurate. The Jew, whom I have not considered as an Oriental, appears in six plays, and in every one he is the villain or one of them. He is either a grasping miser or a treacherous tool, and no sympathy is 441 182 Louis Wann ever shown for him. Eastern Christians are treated very shghtly and figure almost universally as slaves and inferiors. In brief, the characterization of the Oriental is fairly accurate, considering the fact that the great majority of dramatists very likely never saw one of them. The attitude toward him is usually one of genuine interest and, except in the case of the Moor, rarely shows any avowed prejudice, if allowances be made for the very natural religious antagonism of Christian toward Mohammedan. The coiJ- fusion of Moor and Negro is of course an error. And we cannot claim a great deal for the dramatist's knowledge of the Orientals other than Turks and Moors. But I think we shall have to give him credit for a much more accurate and dispassionate portrayal of oriental character than we are wont to do. 5. Customs depicted. — We now come to the consideration of the last phase in the analysis of these plays. How closely are the Elizabethan dramatists in touch with the customs of the Orientals, and how accurate are they in depicting them ? That their knowl- edge of oriental life was much greater than we usually give them credit for is quite evident. In almost everything that concerns the Mohammedan religion, the observance of its religious forms and the tenets of its followers, they display considerable knowledge. This is not remarkable when we consider the avidity with which Europeans seized upon all books relating to the religion and customs of the Turks and other Orientals and the great mass of such books that we have seen were at their command. And whatever may be said of the inaccuracy of the histories of the Orient, this charge can hardly be applied to the books describing oriental customs generally and religious customs in particular. For they were more often written by men who had seen what they described and dealt with contempo- rary matters and not with affairs of two hundred years past. Many of our plays are quite specific in describing religious tenets, as Mus- tapha and Alaham. The life of the seraglio and harem seems to have been fairly well known. And The Renegado of Massinger is an excellent example of a play showing throughout an intimate knowl- edge of minor but telling details in regard to oriental life that nobody but a careful student or an eyewitness could possess. Except for such minor inaccuracies as the mention of a church or temple in 442 The Oriental in Elizabethan Drama 183 place of a mosque, and allowing for the almost miiversal conception of the Turks as more superstitious than the Europeans, it is pretty- certain that, generally speaking, the customs of the Orientals were depicted with a fair approach to accuracy and a proper conception of their significance. There is, however, at least one glaring exception to this tolerably faithful portrayal of eastern customs — the introduction of suicide among the Mohammedans. As I pointed out in dealing with the sources of the Mustapha plays, European historians transformed the death of Tchihanger by grief into his death by suicide, contrary to the facts and all Ottoman historians. This was not merely a dis- tortion of a particular fact, ])ut, as we shall see, a violent misrepre- sentation of a fundamental rule of life among all Mohammedan peoples. Suicide of Orientals occurs in six of our body of plays — in Alaham, Revenge for Honor, Osmond, Mustapha, Soly?nannidae, and Tamhurlaine, I. The Elizabethan audience might be justified in concluding from this fairly prominent presentation of suicide that suicide was as common among Orientals as it had been among the ancient Greeks and Romans, and still was among all Christian peoples. Nothing, however, could be farther from the truth ;'.s anyone acquainted with oriental life and history knows. A brief citation from von Hammer will suffice to make clear the truth of this assertion. In relating the death by self -starvation of Chosrew Pasha, a favorite minister of Suleiman's who in 1547 experienced a sudden fall from glory strikingly similar to that of Cardinal Wolsey, von Hammer says: "and he took neither food nor drink, till on the seventh day he died; a manner of death not uncommon among Greeks and Romans, but almost unheard of in the histories of the Moslims, who moreover are preserved from the cowardice of death through suicide by religious submission to the decrees of fate."* It is evident from this passage that suicide has always been rare among MosHms, just as it is today. Very likely the dramatist was not acquainted with this fact, and in making his Orientals commit suicide he was merely introducing one of the time-honored stage- scenes that would be perfectly true to life among any but Moslim peoples. Still, as indicating a lack of knowledge concerning a most » III, 2S2. 443 184 Louis Wann fundamental attitude toward life, or at least a disregard for this attitude, the Elizabethan dramatist and, therefore, the Elizabethan people must be charged with a limited conception of at least one important phase of oriental life. III. CONCLUSION We are now ready to attempt an answer to the question, "How extensive and how accurate was the knowledge of the Elizabethans regarding the Orient?" We shall first glance very briefly at the political situation; and then, bringing together the conclusions reached in the study of the nature and extent of our corpus of plays as a whole, and the various aspects of the analysis we have under- taken, we shall endeavor to focus the light from these various sources on this final question. If there ever was a time in the world's history when the eyes of Europe should have been turned to the Orient, the sixteenth century was that time. And if there ever was a period in which interest in the East was not merely one of curiosity or novelty, but an active interest made necessary by the conditions of the time, it was the Elizabethan period. In the year 1600 the Ottoman empire was by far the most powerful in the world. Its territories extended from the Persian Gulf on the southeast to within a few miles of Vienna on the northwest; from the Atlas Mountains of Africa on the south- west to the Caucasus on the northeast. Twenty different races inhabited this empire. Its armies had for two hundred years been the best in existence, and, although some improvement had taken place in the armies of western Europe during the sixteenth century, " the Ottoman troops were still far superior to them in discipline and in general equipment."^ Under Suleiman the Magnificent, whose splendid reign of forty-six years had closed in 1566, the empire had been thoroughly consolidated, it enjoyed prosperity at home and universal prestige abroad. We have seen what a flood of books poured over Europe in the sixteenth century, telling of the rise of the Ottoman empire, relating in detail the exploits of the sultans, describing minutely the customs and reHgion of these powerful people. The Elizabethans, like all 1 Creasy, p. 201. 444 The Oriental in Elizabethan Drama 185 the rest of Europe, were eager readers of these books. But it was not alone through books or mere hearsay that they acquired an interest in the Orient. The contact was much more real. From the year 1579, when three English merchants obtained from the Porte the same privileges for English residents in Turkey as those already enjoyed by other nations, the number of English merchants, travelers, and officials who visited or settled in the Orient constantly increased. In 1583 William Harebone became the ambassador of Queen Elizabeth to Constantinople, and, as Creasy says, sought anxiously to induce the Sultan to make common cause with her against the Spanish King [Philip II], and his great confederate the Pope of Rome .... and there is a letter addressed by her agent at the Porte to the Sultan in Nov. 1587, at the time when Spain was threatening England with the Great Armada, in which the Sultan is implored to send, if not the whole tremendous force of his empire, at least 60 or 80 galleys, "against that idolater, the King of Spain, who, relying on the help of the Pope and all idolatrous princes, designs to crush the Queen of England, and then to turn his whole power to the destruction of the Sultan, and make himself universal monarch.* The Turks promised help, but did nothing. Not only did the Enghsh use persuasion, but they are said to have sought, by large gifts of money to Seadeddin the historian, to gain the ear of the Sultan, in whose favor he was. There are three other letters to the Sultan from Elizabeth or her ambassador; one from Windsor in 1582, concerning commercial privileges; another of 1587, requesting the release of some English prisoners from Algiers ; a third of Novem- ber 30, 1588, announcing the defeat of the Armada, and still urging the Sultan to attack Spain.^ In 1599 the Queen sent Thomas Dal- lam, a master organ-builder, to Constantinople with the present of an elaborate organ for the Sultan as a means of winning his favor for English commerce in the East and his help against her enemies.^ These are some of the incidents showing the practical nature of the relations between England and Turkey. After 1600, of course, these relations were of increasing significance.^ Not only did the 1 Creasy, pp. 227-28. 2 See von Hammer, IV, 621-25, where all these letters are given in full. * See the Diary of Master Thomas Dallam, 1599-1600, edited for the Hakluyt Society by J. Theodore Bent (London, 1893). < The first Turkish envoy to England, Mustapha, arrived In 1606. 445 186 Louis Wann English go to Turkey, but the Turks came to England — with differ- ent intent, however. The following from Bates's Touring in 1600 illustrates the further reason the Elizabethans had for being inter- ested in the Turks: In 1616 Sir G. Carew writes to Sir T. Roe that the Turks are passing out of the Mediterranean now, had just carried off all the inhabitants of St. Marie, one of the Azores, and might be looked for round England soon. In 1630 they took six ships near Bristol and had about forty of their vessels in British seas. In the following year they sacked Baltimore in Ireland; but so far was the EngUsh government from being able to assert itself that Robert Bayle writes of his passage from Youghal to Bristol past Ilfracombe and Minehead in 1635, that he passed safely "though the Irish coasts were then sufficiently infested with Turkish galleys; while in 1645 they called at Fowey and carried off into slavery two hundred and forty persons, including some ladies."' It was not mere desire for novelty, then, that prompted this interest in the Orient. It was of necessity an active and lively interest in a powerful people, similar in many ways to our interest in the Japanese of today. With this hasty survey of the political situation in mind, we are now ready to draw our conclusions. In the first place, we saw from the mere list of plays and the variety of subjects treated that the interest in the Orient was con- siderable. We then saw from the study of the types represented that the interest inclined to plays of a more serious nature — mostly tragedies and conqueror plays. From a survey of the sources we saw that in the majority of cases history was the material used, and that while this history was by no means always accurate as to details it reproduced the essential spirit of the Orient with a fair degree of truth and was in general faithfully followed by the authors of these plays. We saw further that these plays dealt with almost every land bordering the Mediterranean, but principally with Turkey. The nationalities represented included also practically all the races of the Orient. The Turks appeared most frequently, then the Moors; and while in certain cases striking inaccuracies were noticed, and while the delineation of the other oriental races was made with much less distinctness and understanding, yet on the whole the por- trayal of the Oriental was fairly true to life. We saw, also, that vc. the depiction of customs the Elizabethan dramatist was, in general > E. S. Bates, Touring in 1600 (New York, 1911), pp. 185-86. 446 The Oriental in Elizabethan Drama 187 possessed of sufficient knowledge and sympathy to present to his audience a fairly detailed and correctly colored picture of oriental ways of life. In the important matter of suicide, however, we were compelled to charge him with either lack of knowledge or disregard of it. Keeping in mind, then, the considerable interest in the Orient that certainly did exist, and which is evidenced by the great number and variety of books about the Orient, by the number and variety of these plays themselves, and by the political situation of the time, we should expect a considerable and fairly accurate knowledge of the objects of this interest. And this, it seems to me, is what we find revealed in these plays. We have found some historical inaccuracies, a lack of any very distinct conception of race characteristics other than those of the Turks and Moors, and a rather serious miscon- ception of a fundamental rule of life. Yet, if we consider the pitifully meager knowledge possessed by the average American regarding the history, character, and customs of the Oriental, aided as he is by the book of travel, the newspaper, the telegraph, and the touring- steamer, we shall feel that he has made little use of his advan- tages. And I have little hesitation in recording my belief that, speaking not only comparatively but absolutely, the average Eliza- bethan had as wide and as accurate a knowledge of the Orient as has the average American of the present day. Louis Wann University of Wisconsin 447 THE ORIENTAL IN RESTORATION DRAMA BY LOUIS WANN REPRINTED FROM UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES IN LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE NUMBER 2 JAN Of d. 10 1920 THE ORIENTAL IN RESTORATION DRAMA Louis Wann The phrase "Light from the East" possesses, by virtue of an accident of geography, a more unique significance for English literature than for any other important literature of modern nations. Every outside influence of importance has, necessarily and literally, come from the East, in con- tradistinction, for example, to the case of Russian literature. But we do not, of course, use the phrase in this broad sense. The two greatest cultural influences in the formation of Eng- lish thought and literature through the centuries, that of Greek and Roman civilization conveyed by means of the Renaissance, and that of Hebrew civilization conveyed, for a longer period, by means of the Bible, are both, in a stricter sense than that just used, Oriental in provenance and nature. Yet we do not call the classics and the Bible Oriental. There is, then, a third important civilization or group of civiliza- tions, which, though deprived of the stimulus of a Renais- sance or the irresistible power of a Bible to aid it, neverthe- less made its attraction felt fairly early in English literature, and for the past four hundred years has affected with in- creasing profoundness the literary expression, if not the life, of the English people. This third civilization we call that of the Orient. Because of its important place in the history of the liter- ature, the influence of the Orient deserves more study than we have hitherto given it. Except for the eighteenth and nine- teenth centuries, it has been neglected.^ And it is in the ^ Only two important contributions to thie subject, and these in re- stricted fields, have been made : Conant, Martha Pike, The Oriental Tale in England in the 18th Century, 1908, and Meester, M. E. de, Oriental Influences in the English Literature of the 19th Century, 1915. Com- pare the fuller treatments for French literature by Martino, Pierre. L'Orient dans la litterature francaise au xvii et au xviii siecle, 1906. 164 UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN STUDIES two centuries preceding these that the real beginnings of the influence may be seen and studied, with its gradual develop- ment toward the conception of the Orient that produced the eighteenth century tale, the Orient-fascinated poet of the Romantic movement, and finally the scientific Orientalist of the nineteenth century. The place of the Oriental in Restor- ation drama constitutes one chapter in this study of four centuries of influence, which, linked with a similar study of the Oriental in the Elizabethan drama^ and the half-century preceding it, offers significant evidence of the manner in which the lure of the Orient fastened itself upon the English dramatist and the English citizen, and revealed itself in the productions of the stage during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. A consideration of the conception of the Oriental as a dramatis persona in Restoration drama may, then, profit- ably be entertained. By way of clearness, we may first distinguish clearly the meaning of Orient and Oriental. Though these words con- vey to most minds a signification definite enough as opposed, broadly, to Occident and Occidental, they are yet capable of various interpretations when the question of exact de- limitation is raised. What are the exact or approximate boundaries of the Orient, both in time and place (for it is a question both of chronology and geography) ? Just what are the elements that go to form our picture of the Orient? In the broadest sense, an Oriental is one whose native habitat lies, without respect to time, within the following geographical area in the three continents of Europe, Africa, and Asia : In Europe, the Balkan States, Greece, and European Turkey; in Africa, all the lands bordering the southern shore of the Mediterranean, including the modern states of Morocco, Al- geria, Tunis, Tripoli, and Egypt; in Asia, practically the entire continent, from the Mediterranean to the Pacific, in- cluding the Oceanic Archipelago. =" See my article. The Oriental in Elizabethan Drama, in Moidern Phi- lology XII: 423-447 of which this study is a continuation on the same general plan and to which rather frequent reference must be made in the present paper. THE ORIENTAL IN RESTORATION DRAMA 165 But this broad conception of the Orient, for us of the twen- tieth century, as well as for Englishmen of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, is virtually a composite of three kindred conceptions of the Orient, corresponding to the three great influences above-mentioned. We may call these, for lack of better terms, the biblical Orient, the classical Orient, and the Orient proper. The distinction will be clear if we compare three specimens of the English drama, whose sub- ject-matter is alike in being Oriental in the broadest sense, yet different in varying distinctly the connotation of the term. Peele's David and BetJisabe, Dryden's All for Love, and Davenant's Siege of Rliodes are all Oriental, insofar as their scene of action is concerned. Yet the first is biblical, the second is classical, and only the third is specifically and properly Oriental. In addition to limitations of habitat, then, we shall have to fix limitations of time that will exclude the biblical and classical character. The clearest dividing line is the sixth century, which saw the rise of Mohammedanism with its attendant menace to Europe and the consequent focusing of attention on the Saracen, Moor, Tartar, Turk and other races of the Orient proper. The term Oriental, as here em- ployed, then, designates anyone whose native Jiahitat ivas in any of tJie parts of Europe, Africa, or As