and Fletcher has himself informed us that "the people," having no idea what a "pastoral tragi-comedy" was, and "missing Whitsun-ales, cream, wassail, and morris-dances, began to be angry." In good truth, dramas of this description, which exhibit an impossible state of sylvan life, and make their strongest appeal for favour by the charms of poetry, are rather for the closet than the theatre. That The Sad Shepherd of Jonson has reached us incomplete, will be ever regretted by the reader, —but by the reader only. Even when containing nothing of the ideal, and reflecting the actual manners and feelings of the country where the scene is laid, a pastoral play has little power upon an audience %. -Fletcher had been dead several years when The Faithful Shepherdess was revived at court, on the occasion of an entertainment given by the Queen to the King at Denmark-House on Twelfth-Night, 1633-4 h. Soon after that revival (as we learn from the title-page of the third quarto) it was acted "divers times with great applause" at the theatre in Blackfriars. The favour which it had experienced at court was doubtless the cause of its being produced at the Blackfriars, and in all probability too the cause of its eliciting this tardy applause from the public, who were now prepared to like what royalty had condescended to admire. We hear of no subsequent attempt to revive The Faithful Shepherdess: the prophecy of Jonson that it would "rise up a glorified work to time," has been fulfilled; but not through the medium of the stage. From this pastoral, as is well known, Milton borrowed largely for his immortal masque. Some critics, after closely comparing The Faithful Shepherdess with Comus, have pronounced, that, if we take into consideration the lyric portions only, Milton seems scarcely to have surpassed his predecessor,-an opinion from which I altogether dissent the lyric strains of Fletcher are beautiful indeed; but in those of Milton a loftier imagination, a "diviner fire," is, I g of this we have a proof in Ramsay's Gentle Shepherd, a work dear to all the author's countrymen: it owes none of its well-merited popularity to the Scottish stage. When it was originally acted is not known but it was certainly played as an after-piece at Edinburgh in 1729, previous to which date it had passed through several editions, having been first published in 1725. Of the later attempts to bring it on the stage in Scotland, none have been attended with much success. When performed at the London theatres, it was tolerated partly as a curiosity, and partly on account of the music. h From Marmyon's verses (vol. ii. 18) we may gather that its revival was suggested by Taylor the player. I cannot believe that her Majesty had a very refined taste in such matters. Montague's Shepherd's Paradise, which was privately acted before the King by the Queen and her Ladies of Honour, is a piece of such intolerable nonsense (to say nothing of its length) that one wonders how the fair performers, even with the prompter's assistance, could have got through their parts. It was not printed till 1659: most of the copies have, by a press-error, the date 1629. think, every where manifest. There have been critics who have even doubted to which of the two dramas the palm of excellence should, on the whole, be given,—a doubt something more than foolish: The Faithful Shepherdess is a gem with several flaws and clouds; the Masque at Ludlow Castle is "one entire and perfect chrysolite." The Knight of the Burning Pestle would seem to have been brought upon the stage in 1611. Whether it was the joint-composition of our authors, or written by one of them alone, is matter of uncertainty: Mr. Darley thinks that it is "by Beaumont chiefly." The satire of this excellent mock-heroic play (the first of its kind in our language both as to date and merit) is directed against the absurdities of the earlier dramas, more particularly those of Heywood's Four Prentices of London, while, at the same time, the ignorance and conceit of the citizens are abundantly ridiculed throughout. The whole is highly artistic and in perfect keeping; the humour of great breadth and raciness. On its first performance, however, it was quite as unsuccessful as The Faithful Shepherdess: "the world," says the publisher, “for want of judgment, or not understanding the privy mark of irony about it, utterly rejected it.' Perhaps, as has been suggested, it owed its condemnation to the anger of the citizens and apprentices: the latter, indeed, who were a very riotous and a really formidable band, must have felt no little indignation at the ludicrous picture of their fellow Ralph,—especially after the compliment paid to them by the above-mentioned play of Heywood, which in sober earnest sets forth how the four sons of Godfrey Earl of Bulloigne (who finish their prodigious exploits by mainly contributing to the conquest of Jerusalem) were originally bound apprentices to London tradesmenk!-Many years seem to have elapsed before The Knight of the Burning Pestle was revived: but about 1635 it was a favourite piece; and it was acted with success even after the Restoration. A King and No King was certainly produced in 1611, and as certainly composed by our authors in conjunction, though, as usual, their i Its title was perhaps suggested by that of an earlier (and not extant) play, The history of the Knight in the Burning Rock: see Cunningham's Extracts from the Accounts of the Revels at Court, &c. p. 142. i Introd. to the Works of B. and F., p. xlviii. k The Four Prentises of London was written about the close of the preceding century: the earliest edition known is dated 1615; but an expression in the present play (vol. ii. 200, where see note) seems to shew that there must have been a considerably earlier edition. Heywood dedicates it "To the honest and hie-spirited Prentises, the Readers", and concludes his Dedication thus ; "But, to returne againe to you, my braue spirited Prentises, upon whom I haue freely bestowed these Foure, I wish you all, that haue their courages and forwardnesse, their noble Fates and Fortunes." respective shares cannot be determined. The chief subject of this tragi-comedy is far from pleasing; its plot is liable to great objections; and it contains but few passages of striking poetic merit: yet must it ever rank among the chefs-d'œuvre of Beaumont and Fletcher. The suspense in which we are kept during the first four acts is relieved by a discovery, which, though rather violently brought about, we have certainly not anticipated. The character of Arbaces is strangely compounded of valour, boastfulness, insolence, selfishness, generosity, and voluptuousness; and there is assuredly great dramatic effect in the instantaneous changes of his temper, in the various moods by which, at the slightest impulse, he is swayed: perhaps, however, the mechanism of this (I allude to the earlier part of the play) is occasionally too apparent; the reader almost feels as if he were present at a puppetshow, and saw more than a spectator ought to see, the master of the exhibition pulling the wires that govern the motions of his puppet. The first meeting of Arbaces and Panthea, and his sudden intoxication with her beauty, are admirably conceived; and the subsequent inconsistencies of his conduct, while under the bewildering influence of a supposed incestuous passion, against which he vainly struggles, are displayed with a truth and vigour worthy of all praise. The character of Panthea is drawn with little force. That of Bessus (a study after Ben Jonson's "humours") has been greatly lauded by the earlier as well as some of the modern critics; but, though containing a considerable portion of vis comica, it is, on the whole, a violent caricature,—inferior, as the portrait of a swaggering coward, both to Parolles and to Bobadil, not to mention Falstaff, with whom Bessus has been rashly compared. The shafts of criticism had not yet assailed The Arcadia of Sidney; it was still the delight of thousands when it furnished the groundwork of the drama next to be mentioned,-Cupid's Revenge. According to the earliest extant notice of this tragedy, it was acted by the Children of Whitefriars on the Sunday following New-year's night, 1611-12; and we may suppose that only a short time had elapsed between that date and its original representation. In an address to the Reader (prefixed to the first quarto) the Printer speaks of "the author [Fletcher]"; but, as he immediately adds that "he is not acquainted with him", his authority is insufficient to establish that the play was wholly by Fletcher; and the generally received opinion that Beaumont had some share in its composition is probably correct.-Cupid's Revenge, though a wretched drama, appears not only to have met with great success at first, but to have long continued popular. 1 See, for instance, act i. sc. 1 (vol. ii. 245) ; “ Arb. Talk'd enough!” &c., and the dialogue which follows. Among the noble ladies of the time, few were more distinguished for their love of poetry and patronage of poets than Elizabeth Countess of Rutland. She was the only child of Sir Philip Sidney, and the wife of Roger fifth earl of Rutland. Ben Jonson told Drummond that she was nothing inferior to her father in poesie ; and in an epistle which he addressed to her, after declaring that he has no gold to send her,— only "verse," he says, 66 m" "With you, I know, my offering will find grace; Almost you have, or may have when you will "." Her marriage was an unhappy one°; and she probably hoped to find in literature some consolation for her domestic grievances. It would seem, however, that the earl disapproved of the familiarity with which she treated those men of genius whom she patronized; for, on one occasion, "he accused her that she keept table to poets? ".-Beaumont, like the rest, offered up his poetical incense to this admired lady in a short Epistle; and when (having survived her husband little more than a month) she died in August 1612, he lost no time in putting forth an Elegy. Neither of these pieces rises above mediocrity, though the latter is praised by Earle as "A monument that will then lasting be, When all her marble is more dust than sher.". "Sir m Notes of Jonson's Conversations with Drummomd, p. 16, ed. Shake. Soc. Th: Overburie ", continues the record, "was in love with her, and caused Ben to read his Wyffe to her, which he, with ane excellent grace, did, and praised the author. That the morne thereafter he discorded with Overburie, who would haue him to intend a sute that was unlawful. The lines my Lady keep'd in remembrance, He comes too near who comes to be denied. Beaumont wrott that Elegie on the death of the Countess of Rutland ". " Jonson's Works, vii. 277, ed. Gifford. • The cause is told plainly enough in Beaumont's Elegy on her death. "Ben one day being at table with my Lady Rutland, her Husband comming in accused her that she keept table to poets, of which she writt a letter to him [Jonson], which he answered. My Lord intercepted the letter, but never challenged him ". Notes of Jonson's Conversations, &c. p. 24.—The earl was, at one time, a great lover of the drama: in a letter to Sir Robert Sidney, dated 11th Oct., 1599, Rowland Whyte writes thus; "My Lord Southhampton and Lord Rutland came not to the Court; the one doth but very seldome; they pass away the Tyme in London merely in going to Plaies euery Day". Collins's Sidney Letters, &c. ii. 132. Chamberlaine, in a letter to Sir R. Winwood, says; "The Widow Countess of Rutland dyed lately, and is privately buryed in Pauls, by her Father Sir Phillip Sydney and Secretary Walsingham. Sir Walter Raleigh is slandered to have given her certaine Pills that dispatch'd her ". Winwood's Memorials, iii. 385. r Commend. Poems, vol. i. xxxv. The Coxcomb appears to have been the joint-work of Beaumont and Fletcher. We may presume that it was originally performed towards the close of 1612, as Rosseter and the Children of the Queen's Revels were paid by a warrant, dated 24th November of that year, for having presented it before the Prince, the Princess Elizabeth, and the Count Palatine, when probably it was still a noveltys. We learn from the prologue at a revival of the play, that on its first representation, while it was favourably received by "men of worth", it was condemned for its length by some "among the ignorant multitude".-Though an amusing comedy, with several snatches of natural painting, it is, on the whole, extravagant in plot, character, and incident. On the marriage of the Princess Elizabeth and the Count Palatine of the Rhine, the Inns of Court determined to present masques of a very splendid description to the royal family at Whitehall. Accordingly, the Middle-Temple and Lincoln's-Inn employed Chapman to compose a piece for the occasion. The Inner-Temple and Gray's Inn selected Beaumont (himself a member of the former society) to supply them with a rival entertainment: its machinery and contrivances were by Inigo Jones (as were those of the other masque); and even Bacon “ by his countenance and loving affection advanced it."-The Masque of the Middle-Temple and Lincoln's-Inn" (a masque of great magnificence) was exhibited s❝Item, paid to Philip Rosseter, by Warrant, 24 November, 1612, for himself and the Children of the Queen's Majesty's Revels, for presenting before the Princess Elizabeth and the Count Palatine a comedy called The Coxcomb £6. 13. 4". Memoranda concerning Plays acted at Court, from the Accounts of Lord Harrinjton, &c.,-Shakespeare Soc. Papers, ii. 125. "To Philip Rosseter upon a warrant dated the 24th of November 1612, for presenting a play [The Coxcomb] by the Children of the Chapple before the Prince, the lady Elizabeth, and the Prince Palatyne vj1i. xiijs. iiijd.” Introd. to Cunningham's Extracts from the Accounts of the Revels at Court, &c. p. xlii.—We are told in the Biog. Dram. that when the elder Colman composed his comedy called The Suicide, which was acted in 1778, but never printed, he borrowed "the duel from The Coxcomb of Beaumont and Fletcher ". What is meant by "the duel?" * See the Dedication, vol. ii. 455. For particulars of the charges attending this masque, see ibid. p. 453. " The Memorable Maske of the two Honorable Houses or Inns of Court; the Middle Temple, and Lyncolns Inne. As it was performd before the King, at White-Hall on Shrove Munday at night; being the 15. of February. 1613. At the Princely celebration of the most Royall Nuptialls of the Palsgraue, and his thrice gratious Princesse Elizabeth, &c. With a description of their whole show; in the manner of their march on horse-backe to the Court from the Maister of the Rolls his house with all their right Noble consorts, and most showfull attendants. Inuented, and fashioned, with the ground, and speciall structure of the whole worke, By our Kingdomes most Artfull and Ingenious Architect Innigo Jones. Supplied, Aplied, Digested, and written, by Geo : Chapman. At London, Printed by G. Eld, for George Norton and are to be sould al his shoppe neere Temple-bar. n. d., 4to. : |