Shakespeare, Burlesqued by Two Fellow-Dramatists 9781463221898

Citation preview

Shakespeare, Burlesqued by Two Fellow-Dramatists

A n a l e c t a Gorgiana

351 Series Editor George Anton Kiraz

Analecta Gorgiana is a collection of long essays and

short

monographs which are consistently cited by modern scholars but previously difficult to find because of their original appearance in obscure publications. Carefully selected by a team of scholars based on their relevance to modern scholarship, these essays can now be fully utili2ed by scholars and proudly owned by libraries.

Shakespeare, Burlesqued by Two Fellow-Dramatists

Henry Wood

l gorgias press 2009

Gorgias Press LLC, 180 Centennial Ave., Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2009 by Gorgias Press LLC Originally published in All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. 2009

1

ISBN 978-1-60724-605-3

ISSN 1935-6854

Extract from The A^merican Journal of Philology 16 (1895)

Printed in the LTnited States of America

AMERICAN

J O U R N A L OF

PHILOLOGY

V O L . X V I , 3.

WHOLE

NO. 63.

I . — S H A K E S P E A R E , B U R L E S Q U E D BY T W O FELLOW-DRAMATISTS. I.—THE FALSTAFF

PLAYS.

Histriomastix, though inferior as a play, still engages an intermittent interest in the question, W h o was the Player Whipped ? Simpson's identification of the actor-poet Post-haste with Shakespeare was not convincing. T h e line, 'that when he shakes his furious spear,' made it seem possible that the great dramatist and his Troilus and Cressida were glanced at, but that was merely in the second of three plays within the play, scraps only of each being rehearsed. T h e line has remained enigmatical, from the apparent lack of any motive for a random hit at Shakespeare in the production as a whole. Of more recent critics, F. G. Fleay promised 'to trace the Jonson, Marston, Dekker, Shakespeare quarrel to these plays.' But Fleay pronounces any reference of Post-haste to Shakespeare 'absurd,' and shifts his own ground of identification from Heywood to the arid regions of Antony Monday's art. These appear to be dashes in several wrong directions, rather than any advance beyond previous theories. Richard Simpson's happy guess, unsupported by evidence and extremely limited in application, has been selected as the startingpoint of the present study of the play. 1 1

Swinburne (Nineteenth Century, October, 1888) calls Simpson a 'harmless monomaniac,' and protests against all investigation of Histriomastix: ' T h i s abortion of letters is such a very moon-calf, begotten by malice on idiocy, that no human creature above the intellectual level of its author will ever dream of attempting to decipher the insignificant significance which may possibly—

274

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

T h e dramatic stock-in-trade of Post-haste's c o m p a n y wholly of crude plays and interludes: (a t r a g e d y ) ,

The

Devil

and

D i v e s (a c o m e d y ) , etc.

plays are of a piece with these; they a r e : T h e The

Lascivious

consists

Mother Gurton's

Needle

His

Prodigal

own Child,

K n i g h t and L a d y Nature, Troilus and Cressida,

and an u n n a m e d play.

T h e s e c o n d o f t h e s e c o n c e a l s in its t i t l e

a caricature of S h a k e s p e a r e ' s M e r r y W i v e s of W i n d s o r . I t m u s t n o t b e f o r g o t t e n t h a t t h e o r i g i n a l title o f t h i s p l a y , a s published,

read:

Windsor.

M i s t r e s s F o r d , to w h o s e r o l e a s h e r o i n e M i s t r e s s P a g e

Sir

John

a c t s t h e p a r t o f a Soubrette and the Lascivious F a l s t a f f " at

their

Falstaff

and

Merry

Wives

of

in t h e p r i n c i p a l s c e n e s , is L a d y N a t u r e ,

K n i g h t is S i r J o h n .

first

the

rendezvous

a m o r o u s c o u r t s h i p , in t h e s n a t c h

T h e opening speech of

strikes

the

tone

of

from Sir Ph. Sidney's

phel: ' H a v e I caught m y heavenly jewel?'

courtly Astro-

T h e ensuing protes-

tations m i n g l e fulsome c o m p l i m e n t with c o n d e s c e n d i n g familiarity. Falstaff. Mistress Ford, I cannot cog, I cannot prate, Mistress Ford. Now shall I sin in my wish: I would thy husband were dead : I'll speak it before the best lord; I would make thee my lady. Mrs. Ford. I your lady, Sir John ! alas, I should be a pitiful lady ! Falstaff. Let the court of France show me such another. I see how thine eye would emulate the diamond: thou hast the right arched beauty of the though improbably—be latent under the opaque veil of its inarticulate virulence.' More of the same and still more vehement will be found on page 543. T h e ranting and roaring comedy Mr. Swinburne is criticizing was not published as a sober study in literature, but it suggests sinister comparisons. Melancholy results of such moody criticism are not far to seek. Ph. Aronstein (John Marston als Dramatiker, Englische Studien, vol. 20, 1895) copies Swinburne's'hot and heavy blossom of rhetoric,' als diktirf euch der Heilig' Geist, and informs his readers that, after plodding through Histriomastix, he feels as hopelessly confused as the Scholar in Faust. But while his distinguished literary sponsor in the matter of Histriomastix may be suspected now and then of being des trocknen Tons nun satt, even when he dons the critic's gown, it would be in all seriousness interesting to learn what species of scholar Mr. Aronstein feels like, when grandly waving a play aside which he confesses he does not understand: "Selbstverständlich brauchen wir es bei der kritischen Betrachtung der Dramen Marstons nicht zu berücksichtigen.' Even Mr. Bullen maintains towards this play an attitude barely consistent, and disappointing: ' Marston's hand is plainly discernible' [Text] ; ' I have not included [it] in this edition of Marston. [It] is of little value and easily accessible. Marston's share in Histriomastix was slight' [Note]. The present study, being chiefly concerned with the play itself, was not written in the hope of lifting this veil of anonymity ; but Marston has been freely called the author, inasmuch as the evidence in favor of this view, already in hand and to be presented in this series of studies, is very strong, if not overwhelming.

SHAKESPEARE,

BURLESQUED.

275

brow that becomes the ship-tire, the tire-valiant, or any tire of Venetian admittance. Mrs. Ford. A plain kerchief, Sir John: my brows become nothing else; nor that well neither. Falstaff. By the Lord, thou art a traitor to say so: thou wouldst make an absolute courtier; and the firm fixture of thy foot would give an excellent motion to thy gait in a semi-circled farthingale. I see what thou wert, if Fortune thy foe were not, Nature thy friend [i. e. Nature being, as she is, thy friend] -1

' Fortune my foe,' the dismally popular song, lends something of its pregnant, aphoristic quality to the converse, ' N a t u r e thy friend.' T h e author of Histriomastix chooses to take seriously the implied overstepping of the boundaries of caste, as ruinous in its social consequences. Misplaced play-acting patronage is the vice of the lords and ladies most inveighed against in the p l a y ; but the citizens, and particularly the rich 'petty-foggers' h o o d e d wives,' are blamed for not being 'pent in nice respect of civil modesty.' T h e y aim above their station, in dress and ornament. Calamancha cries, ' o u t ! ' upon her own 'velvetguards and black lac'd sleeves, these simpering fashions simply followed,' while the fine ladies resent her later ambitious adornments b y a scornful ' G i p , Velvet-guards !' But this yearning over the sins of the commonwealth, on the part of the author of Histriomastix, is for the most part only the obligatory accompaniment to the real theme, the Player W h i p p e d . T h e hit at Shakespeare, in ' L a d y Nature,' is quickly reinforced in the dialogue. Post-haste abruptly asks his fellow-players, ' my masters, what tire wears y o u r lady on her head ?' [i. e. what ' T h e words, ' I f Fortune thy foe were not, Nature thy friend,' occur for the first time in the Folio of 1623. T h e reference in Histriomastix, if conceded, gains therefore some weight for the discussion of similar discrepancies between the Quartos of several plays and the Folio. T h e popular assumption that the Quarto of 1602 represents merely a first sketch of the Merry Wives of Windsor has been perpetuated by the Cambridge editors, in their latest edition. Against the theory of such a slow elaboration are to be counted, the tradition that Shakespeare finished the play in two weeks at the command of Queen Elizabeth, the scrappy contents of the Quarto, stolen in all probability from the stage, and the surreptitious publication. The tradition is now in some measure reinforced by the consideration that Post-haste's dreaded rapidity of production is part of the caricature of Shakespeare. P. A. Daniel, the editor of the Quarto Facsimile of the Merry Wives, claims that a comparison with the Folio gives evidence of the omission in the Quarto of passages which must have existed in the Folio it is supposed to represent, and that the Quarto is not a first sketch.

276

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

h e a d d r e s s o u g h t I to h a v e g i v e n a l a d y in m y p l a y ? ] . Post-haste inhabits too low a s p h e r e to be s u p p o s e d to k n o w w h a t a l a d y s h o u l d wear. B e l c h , b y occupation a ' b e a r d - m a k e r , ' replies, ' F o u r squirrel tails tied in a true love's k n o t . ' Post-haste rejoins, ' O amiable g o o d , 'tis e x c e l l e n t ! ' T h e c o m m e n t o f the s e c o n d p l a y e r , Gut, on the w h o l e business is, ' F a i t h , w e can r e a d n o t h i n g but riddles.' It is evident that an e a s y riddle w a s intended for t h o s e a m o n g the a u d i e n c e w h o w e r e in the secret, and the interpretation was to be found in t h e scene from the ' M e r r y W i v e s , ' a b o v e cited. 1 T h e h u m o r lies, o f course, in the contrast b e t w e e n Mistress F o r d ' s simple kerchief, appropriate to her station, a n d t h e exotic headdresses p r o p o s e d for her, but worn o n l y b y ladies o f birth and fashion. Staunton, in his note to the scene, e x c l a i m s 1

Marston complains of similar treatment at the hands of hostile play-writers,

and therefore presumably understood the ' retort courteous.'

' Their ungentle

combinings, discourteous whisperings, never so treacherously labor to undermine my u n f e n c e d reputation.'

Preface to the F a w n (1606).

N a y , say some half a dozen rancorous breasts Should plant themselves on purpose to discharge I m p o s t h u m ' d malice at my latest scene. — I n d u c t i o n to W h a t Y o u W i l l (1607). I n B e n Jonson's Poetaster, the prologue ( E n v y ) s p e a k s : F o r I am risse here with a covetous hope, T o blast your pleasures and destroy your sports, W i t h wrestlings, comments, applications, S p y - l i k e suggestions, privy whisperings, A n d thousand such promoting sleights as these. A r e there no players h e r e ? no poet-apes, T h a t come with basilisk's eyes, w h o s e forked tongues A r e steep'd in venom, as their hearts in g a l l ? E i t h e r of these w o u l d help me ; they could wrest, Pervert and poison all they hear and see, W i t h senseless glosses and allusions, T r a d u c e , corrupt, supply, inform, suggest. I n the same play, B e n Jonson introduces the A r m e d P r o l o g u e : I f a n y muse w h y I salute the stage A n armed P r o l o g u e ; k n o w , 'tis a dangerous a g e , W h e r e i n w h o writes, had need present his scenes Forty-fold proof against the conjuring means O f base detractors, and illiterate apes, T h a t fill up rooms in fair and formal shapes.

SHAKESPEARE,

BURLESQUED.

2 77

upon the ' innumerable new-fangled tires, of which the form is lost and not worth seeking.' T h i s is a convenient opportunity for disagreeing with his latter statement, though the 'four squirrels tails tied in a true love's knot,' being a domestic fashion—if indeed not invented for this o c c a s i o n — m a y be far simpler of explanation than the tires of Venetian admittance. In any case, the 'true love's k n o t ' assigns the headdress of L a d y Nature to an incongruously humble sphere of society. Shakespeare had in his way anticipated this carping ( I I , i ) : Mrs. Ford. If I would but go to hell for an eternal moment or so, I could be knighted. Mrs. Page. What t thou liest! Sir Alice Ford ! These knights will h a c k ; and so thou shouldst not alter the article of thy gentry.

Sir A l i c e F o r d and L a d y Nature find easy counterparts in Sir John F a l s t a f f a n d the Lascivious K n i g h t . He wooes both high and low, both rich and poor, Both young and old, one with another, F o r d ; He loves the gallimaufry.

Post-haste's play, T h e Lascivious K n i g h t and L a d y Nature, is cried for three o'clock in the afternoon, at the ' T o w n e - h o u s e . ' W h i l e they wait for the audience, the actor-poet's fellow-players inquire how he proceeds in the plot of his next play, which is to be posted for F r i d a y night. Post-haste.

O sirs, my wit's grown no less plentiful than the time ; There's two sheets done in folio.

T o quiet their perturbation, he gives a maudlin recital from the scene already achieved. T h i s play is called the 'new plot of the Prodigal Child.' A Morality with this title was presented in the year 1574-5. ^ be shown, later on, that Shakespeare's H e n r y 5 is ridiculed in Histriomastix, and the Lascivious K n i g h t has already introduced the M e r r y W i v e s of W i n d s o r . T h e 'new plot of the Prodigal C h i l d ' appears to be aimed at Shakespeare's H e n r y 4, thus m a k i n g the Falstaff cycle of plays complete. Histriomastix accommodates Shakespeare to the perspective of the old Moralities, and H e n r y 4 has preserved distinct traces of that dramatic form, both in plot and execution. Falstaff is in many respects an evolution of the V i c e of the old comedy, and when Prince H e n r y calls him 'white-bearded Satan, Devil, that reverend Vice, that g r e y Iniquity, that father ruffian, that Vanity in years,' he analyzes Falstaff's complex character from the point

278

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

o f view of the M o r a l i t y . In the travesty in Histriomastix, the D e v i l , V i c e , Iniquity and J u v e n t u s appear, and are hailed with W h a t unworthy foolish foppery Presents such buzzardly s i m p l i c i t y ?

F a l s t a f f ' s haunt at the B o a r ' s - H e a d in E a s t c h e a p suits the plot o f the Moralities, w h i c h locate the debaucheries of the P r o d i g a l in a tavern. I f H e n r y 4 is really the p l a y meant, then Juventus is Prince H e n r y . Falstaff, ' t h a t villainous abominable misleader o f y o u t h , ' ' t h e tutor and the feeder of m y riots,' is the p i v o t u p o n w h i c h the c l u m s y burlesque in Histriomastix is adjusted to its ostensible s u b j e c t : the ruin which corrupt p l a y s are p r e p a r i n g for the y o u n g nobility a n d the state. T h e text itself of the p a r o d y , consisting of t w o disjointed p a r a g r a p h s , offers no o p p o r t u n i t y for any p r o o f in detail of the theory advanced. B u t when D a m e V i r t u e addresses the P r o d igal : ' m y son, thou art a lost child, and hast m a n y p o o r men o f their g o o d s b e g u i l ' d , ' a feature foreign to the o r d i n a r y dramatic plot of the story is introduced. If, h o w e v e r , the P r o d i g a l be a caricature of S h a k e s p e a r e ' s Prince H e n r y , the allusion to his m a d c a p a d v e n t u r e , w h e r e the carriers are r o b b e d , is plain. ' S h a l l the son of E n g l a n d p r o v e a thief, and t a k e p u r s e s ? ' A n e x a m i n a t i o n o f S h a k e s p e a r e ' s p l a y a d d s considerable e v i d e n c e in confirmation. K i n g H e n r y 4 bewails his son's inordinate and low desires, his barren pleasures, r u d e society. ' R i o t a n d d i s h o n o r stain the b r o w o f m y y o u n g H a r r y . ' T h e Prince strikes the C h i e f Justice 'in the v e r y seat of j u s t i c e ' and is imprisoned. H e has lost his princely privilege, with vile participation. H i s place in council he has ' r u d e l y lost, w h i c h b y t h y y o u n g e r brother is supplied.' Prince J o h n of L a n c a s t e r , w h o b r e a k s his faith t o w a r d s the capitulating rebels, is in s t r o n g contrast with Prince H e n r y t h r o u g h o u t the play. In the picture F a l s t a f f d r a w s o f the y o u n g e r prince, he is the v e r y pattern o f the P r o d i g a l ' s brother in the Moralities. ' G o o d faith, this s a m e s o b e r - b l o o d e d b o y d o t h not l o v e m e ; nor a man cannot m a k e him l a u g h ; but that's no marvel, he drinks no wine. There's never none of these d e m u r e b o y s c o m e to a n y proof.' But Prince H e n r y m a k e s his ' t r u e s u b m i s s i o n ' to his father, a n d baffles the old V i c e , F a l s t a f f : Presume not, that I am the thing I w a s : F o r God doth k n o w , so shall the world perceive, T h a t I have turned a w a y my former self.

SHAKESPEARE,

BURLESQUED.

T h e tide of blood in me H a t h proudly flowed in vanity till n o w ; N o w doth it turn, and ebb b a c k to the s e a ; W h e r e it shall m i n g l e with the state of

floods,

A n d flow h e n c e f o r t h in formal m a j e s t y .

T h e s e aspects of First and S e c o n d H e n r y 4 constitute it a ' new plot of the P r o d i g a l C h i l d . ' T h e further fact that the caricature in Histriomastix is p l a c e d between the L a s c i v i o u s K n i g h t a n d the remaining p l a y in the series renders it nearly certain that H e n r y 4 is the p l a y meant. 1 T h e threshold of H e n r y 5 has now been reached. H e r e t h e tone o f Histriomastix c h a n g e s . F a l s t a f f disappears, a n d it is no l o n g e r the matter of the play, in the first instance, but the manner o f it, w h i c h is ridiculed. T h e scene is again the private rehearsal o f an u n n a m e d p l a y b y Post-haste, w h o fails to a p p e a r and is fined twelve p e n c e for ' s t a y i n g so late.' Gut.

Prologue begin (rehearse, etc ). G e n t l e m e n , in this envious age we bring B a y a r d for Bucephalus. I f mired, b o g g ' d , draw him forth with your favors.

In H e n r y 4, S h a k e s p e a r e thus describes Prince H e n r y : I saw young H a r r y , with his beaver on, H i s cuisses on his thighs, gallantly arm'd, R i s e from the ground like feather'd Mercury, A n d vaulted with such ease into his seat, A s if an a n g e l dropp'd d o w n from the clouds, T o turn and w i n d a fiery Pegasus, A n d witch the world with noble horsemanship. 1 A new edition of T h e F a m o u s V i c t o r i e s of H e n r y the F i f t h appeared in 1598. T h e republication in that year of the dramatic crudity, from which S h a k e s p e a r e had so recently drawn material for the characters of P r i n c e H e n r y and Falstaff, has been characterized as an outcome of the complaint that Shakespeare had distorted the historical character, Sir John O l d c a s t l e , in his n e w creation [ F l e a y , C h r o n i c l e H i s t o r y , p. 136]. Marston's attack in Histriomastix seems to have owed its i n c e p t i o n and excuse to the very prejudice w h i c h made Shakespeare, in the epilogue to 2 H e n r y 4, disclaim any intention of caricaturing the ' m a r t y r ' O l d c a s t l e . But the importance of the F a m o u s V i c t o r i e s ends here. It is not l i k e l y to have b e e n thought of directly, in the satire on the ' new plot of the Prodigal Child.' I n the F a m o u s Victories, as in H e n r y 4, the story of a prodigal is recounted, but the complete lack of those very touches of the genius of comedy, w h i c h rendered Shakespeare's H e n r y 4 susceptible of caricature, effectually excludes the earlier play from a n y consideration. T h e ' n e w plot of the Prodigal C h i l d ' in Histriomastix is represented as a reworking of the old Morality of that name.

280

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

In the present play the heir apparent of France, in a passage which may have been intended by Shakespeare as a pendant to the above, likens himself to Perseus astride of Pegasus. T h e passage is nearly as long, and as characteristic for the drama and the speakers, as the description of the courser in Venus and Adonis. T h e Dauphin, who ' has his horse to his mistress,' and has written a sonnet in praise of that ' W o n d e r of nature,' takes part in some low by-play on this double theme, which Shakespeare no doubt intended to mark the frivolity of the French nobility, on the eve of the battle of Agincourt. Dauphin. Be warned by me, then: they that ride so, and ride not warily, fall into foul bogs.

I can come to no other conclusion than that the author of Histriomastix made no scruple of descending to the level of this scene in inditing his mock prologue: If mired, bogg'd, draw him forth with your favors.

The first verse of the prologue now claims attention: Gentlemen, in this envious age we bring Bayard for Bucephalus.

K i n g Henry 5 stands in Shakespeare's play for the English Alexander. Fluellen. If you mark Alexander's life well, Harry of Monmouth's life is come after it indifferent w e l l ; for there is figures in all things. Alexander, God knows, and you know, in his rages, and his furies, and his wraths, and his cholers, and his moods, and his displeasures, and his indignations, and also being a little intoxicates in his prains, did, in his ales and his angers, look you, kill his best friend, Cleitus. Gower. Our king is not like him in that: he never killed any of his friends. Fluellin. It is not well done, mark you now, to take the tales out of my mouth, ere it is made and finished. I speak but in the figures and comparisons of it: as Alexander killed his friend Cleitus, being in his ales and his cups ; so also Harry Monmouth, being in his right wits and his good judgements, turned away the fat knight with the great belly-doublet: he was full of jests, and gipes, and knaveries, and mocks ; I have forgot his name. Gower. Sir John Falstaff.

This association of Falstaff with the king, in his new role as Grecian conqueror, is very interesting, but it is the prologue to Henry 5 which gives the final note of explanation. Nowhere has Shakespeare shown such ardor in triumphantly overcoming the limitations of space as in the chorus of this play.

SHAKESPEARE,

BURLESQUED.

T h i n k , w h e n w e talk of horses, that you see them P r i n t i n g their proud hoofs i' the receiving e a r t h ; F o r 'tis your thoughts that now must d e c k our kings, Carry them here and there ; j u m p i n g o'er times, T u r n i n g the accomplishment of many years Into an hour g l a s s : for the w h i c h supply A d m i t me Chorus to this history. Act III.

T h u s with imagined w i n g our swift scene flies I n motion of no less celerity T h a n that of thought. . . . Still be kind, A n d eke out our performance with your mind.

Act V.

N o w w e bear the k i n g T o w a r d C a l a i s : grant him there ; there seen. H e a v e him away upon your w i n g e d thoughts A t h w a r t the sea.

W h e n Ben Jonson, in the prologue to E v e r y M a n in his H u m o r , congratulates himself that his play is such A s other plays should be ; W h e r e neither Chorus w a f t s you o'er the seas, etc.,

he is criticizing with downright directness the prologue-Chorus of H e n r y 5. T h e author of Histriomastix g o e s about it, in the meandering style of his other burlesques, somewhat as follows: the C h o r u s in H e n r y 5 promises to supply the lack of a miraculous charger, to carry the king and the audience over seas to the field of Agincourt. But H e n r y 5 is A l e x a n d e r : therefore the steed is a would-be Bucephalus. Bayard, the name for a bay horse in the early romances, is chivalrous, romantic, modern ; Bucephalus is classical and antique. ' B a y a r d ' was E d w a r d the First's charger at the storming of Berwick. Marston seizes upon these contrasts and resemblances to ridicule Shakespeare's alleged inability to give a classical tone to a modern subject. B e n Jonson's induction to the Poetaster furnishes an exact parallel. Jonson's fond hope that his adversaries would shrink from pursuing him into his domain of classical lore was in a measure realized. But t h e y too were scholars, though far less well e q u i p p e d ; Marston, in particular, emphasizes with unceasing arrogance his gentle breeding and university education. But, whether e n g a g e d in one of his numerous quarrels with Jonson, or not, he rarely fails to imitate him. In the present instance, it is to ridicule Shakespeare's 'small Latin and

282

AMERICAN-

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

less G r e e k . ' T h e antique chorus and the parallel between H e n r y 5 a n d A l e x a n d e r share alike. T h e soaring B u c e p h a l u s is only a Blind B a y a r d , the s y m b o l o f f o o l h a r d y ignorance. 'What B a y a r d bolder than the i g n o r a n t ? ' occurs in the induction to M a r s t o n ' s W h a t Y o u W i l l , and Bullen a d d s the n o t e : ' a p r o v e r b (as old as C h a u c e r ) applied to those w h o d o not l o o k before t h e y leap.' T h e full m e a n i n g of the p r o l o g u e in Histriomastix now becomes plain: G e n t l e m e n , in this envious age w e bring Bayard for Bucephalus. I f mired, bogg'd, draw him forth with your favors.

T h e irony of the classical scholar Marston substitutes this m o d e r n R o z i n a n t e , to voice S h a k e s p e a r e ' s p r e t e n d e d fear of a reprisal o n the stage. T h e alliteration in ' B a y a r d for B u c e p h a l u s ' counts also for s o m e t h i n g towards explaining the contrast introduced. B u t the v e r y striking picture of the E n g l i s h horsemen, a w a i t i n g the m o r n i n g of battle, e x a c t l y fitted the notion of pitiful warriors upon s o r r y j a d e s , for which latter ' B l i n d B a y a r d ' was a p o p u l a r term. 1 B i g Mars seems bankrupt in their beggar'd host A n d faintly through a rusty beaver p e e p s : T h e horsemen sit l i k e fixed candlesticks, W i t h torch-staves in their h a n d ; and the poor j a d e s L o b down their heads, dropping the hides and hips, T h e gum down-roping from their pale-dead eyes, A n d in their pale dull mouths the g i m m a l bit L i e s foul with chew'd grass, still and m o t i o n l e s s ; A n d their executors, the k n a v i s h crows, F l y o'er them, all impatient for their hour.

T h o u g h put in the m o u t h o f a F r e n c h lord, this was a description o f the E n g l i s h a r m y before battle, and the conclusion can scarcely be a v o i d e d that it was m a d e to contribute a share to the wretched caricature of S h a k e s p e a r e ' s C h o r u s . T h e p r o l o g u e to the u n n a m e d p l a y in Histriomastix continues thus: Gut (rehearsing). Gulch. Belch. Gut.

1

So, promising that we never mean to perform, our prologue peaceth. ' Peaceth ?' W h a t p e a k i n g P a g e a n t e r penned that ? W h o but Master Post-haste ? I t is as dangerous to read his name at a play door A s a printed b i l l on a plague door.

T o ride Bayard of ten toes = ambulare (ride shank's mare).

SHAKESPEARE,

BURLESQUED.

283

In the epilogue to 2 H e n r y 4, Shakespeare casts up his reckoning with his audience for the Falstaff cycle, as far as it had proceeded: B e it k n o w n to you, as it is very w e l l , I was lately here in the end of a displeasing play [1 H e n r y 4?], to pray your patience for it and to promise you a better.

I m e a n t indeed to pay you with this.

T h i s is followed by the promise of H e n r y 5 : O n e word more, I beseech you.

I f you be not too m u c h c l o y e d w i t h fat

meat, our humble author w i l l continue his story, with Sir John in it, and make you merry with fair K a t h a r i n e of F r a n c e :

w h e r e , for any thing I

Falstaff shall die of a sweat, unless already a' be k i l l e d with your

know, hard

o p i n i o n s ; for O l d c a s t l e died a martyr, and this is not the man.

M a n y speculations have been indulged in as to the reason w h y Shakespeare chose to leave this promise unredeemed in H e n r y 5. T h e enigmatical prologue to the First Part of Sir John Oldcastle (1599) protests that It is no pampered glutton w e present, N o r a g e d counsellor to youthful sin.

If this be a reproach to Shakespeare for his Sir John, as is extremely probable, then the satire in Histriomastix utters more than a private sneer. T h e ' f o r g e d invention,'that 'former time defaced,' being Shakespeare's misunderstood creation, for which he craved a more favorable j u d g m e n t in the epilogue to 2 Henry 4, the author of Histriomastix forthwith gives himself the air of a public censor of morals, and makes an unworthy use of his self-constituted o f f i c e : — a l l of which is exactly like the satirist Marston. In any case, it seems safe to conclude that Histriomastix, which is almost exclusively concerned with the plays in which Falstaff appeared, and which in the present instance is certainly caricaturing H e n r y 5, must here be tasking Shakespeare with his unfulfilled promise to continue the career of Falstaff in that play. In the induction to E v e r y Man out of his Humor, B e n Jonson assures his audience, I do not this, to b e g your patience, O r servilely to f a w n on your applause, L i k e some dry brain, despairing of his merit.

T h e r e would appear to be evidence enough that Jonson did not

284

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

approve of Shakespeare's deferential tone towards his audience.1 In this, as in other things, Marston apes him. The conclusion of the prologue to Henry 5, Who, prologue-like your humble patience / r a y , Gently to hear, kindly to judge our / l a y ,

and the epilogue to 2 Henry 4, in which /ray,/atience,/lay,/ay and promise play a great part in the argument, suggested to the author of Histriomastix the snarling and malicious riming on the letter: 'So,/romising that we never mean to /erform, our /rologue/eaceth; and,'/'eaceth ?' What/eaking/ageanter/enned that? 2 Who but Master Post-haste?' '/'ageanter' glances askance at the splendid pageantry in the Chorus-prologue of Henry 5, and 'Post-haste' caps the hated / ' s with the name of Shakespeare in the play. The trick of alliteration is then continued in a parody of scenes from Henry 5: Gut.

I'll tear their turret tops, I'll beat their bulwarks down ; I'll rend the rascals from their rags, And whip them out of town.

As to form, this was perhaps suggested by Pistol's rant: And giddy Fortune's furious fickle wheel, That goddess blind, That stands upon the rolling restless stone—

But in point of matter it is a burlesque of the style of the king himself. Henry 5 thus answers the Dauphin's taunting message : For many a thousand widows Shall this his mock mock out of their dear husbands, Mock mothers from their sons, mock castles down ; And some are yet ungotten and unborn That shall have cause to curse the Dauphin's scorn. 1

Cf. induction to Marston's What You Will: Now out upon't, I wonder what tight brain Wrung in this custom to maintain contempt 'Gainst common censure ; to give stiff counter-buffs, To -crack rude scorn even on the very face Of better audience. Slight, is't not odious?

' Marston is here plainly referring to the truculent attitude assumed by Ben Jonson towards the audience.'—Bullen's note. 2 It is immaterial that this word does not occur in Shakespeare. 'Peaceth' simply marks the point where a second player snatches the brandished torch of parody from the hands of his fellow.

SHAKESPEARE,

BURLESQUED.

285

B u t t h e s c e n e b e f o r e H a r f l e u r ( I I I , 3) c o r r e s p o n d s most closely to the verses in Histriomastix. H e n r y 5 threatens: I f I b e g i n the battery once again, I w i l l not leave the h a l f - a c h i e v e d Harfleur, T i l l in her ashes she lie buried.

T h e k i n g ' s s p e e c h contains the alliterations ' b l i n d and b l o o d y soldier,' 'fell feats,' ' m a d mothers,' ' y o u r fresh-fair virgins,' ' y o u r shrill-shrieking d a u g h t e r s . ' It is this forcible a n d h e i g h t e n e d utterance that is caricatured in the m o u t h i n g s of the p a r o d y . T h e k i n g ' s role is sustained in the rehearsal b y the p l a y e r G u t , Post-haste being absent. H i s fellow B e l c h d e c l a r e s : ' I ' l l p l a y t h e c o n q u e r i n g k i n g , that likes m e b e s t ' ; but G u t r e j o i n s : ' T h o u p l a y the c o w a r d l y k n a v e ! T h o u dost but jest.' N o other characters are mentioned, and these t w o answer e x a c t l y to the title of S h a k e s p e a r e ' s p l a y : ' T h e C h r o n i c l e - H i s t o r y of H e n r y the F i f t h , with his battle f o u g h t at A g i n c o u r t in France. T o g e t h e r with A n c i e n t Pistol.' Pistol is e x p r e s s l y called a 'counterfeit c o w a r d l y k n a v e ' ( V , 1). Histriomastix begins with Sir J o h n Falstaff, and, h a v i n g pursued him t h r o u g h his c a r e e r — n o t forg e t t i n g a sneer at S h a k e s p e a r e for his t a k i n g o f f — e n d s its impotent caricature with Pistol, the last fruit of the old tree. T h e c o m m e n t of the p l a y e r , G u t , on the m o c k p r o l o g u e to H e n r y 5 must now be considered : It is as dangerous to read his name at a play door A s a printed bill on a plague door.

T h i s has b e e n explained as indicating that Post-haste was unpopular. T h e m i s t a k e n interpretation is o n l y explainable on the t h e o r y that identified Post-haste with some o b s c u r e m a n a g e r of a minor c o m p a n y o f p l a y e r s . B u t Post-haste is S h a k e s p e a r e , and the satire witnesses u n i m p e a c h a b l y to his v o g u e as a dramatist. ' D a n g e r o u s ' has e x a c t l y the same m e a n i n g here as in V e n u s and A d o n i s 508, ' t o drive infection from the d a n g e r o u s y e a r . ' D u r i n g this w h o l e period, the L o n d o n statute d e c r e e d that n o p l a y s s h o u l d be presented, when the d e a t h s in the city from t h e p l a g u e e x c e e d e d forty each w e e k . T h e f r e q u e n c y o f the p l a g u e notices on the d o o r s o f stricken h o m e s g a u g e d therefore for the p l a y e r s their p r o s p e c t s of plenty or distress. T h e figure o f s p e e c h in the t e x t v o i c e s the pretence of a b h o r r e n c e at the fatal contagion of Post-haste's vicious a n d pestilent dramatic style, but behind this l u r k s the actual d r e a d , that S h a k e s p e a r e ' s u n e x a m p l e d fertility

286

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

and popularity as the poet of the Falstaff plays, will deprive the professed playwrights of their most profitable market for plays in his, the standard company. The prosperity of the shareholders in Shakespeare's Blackfriars enterprise is eyed askance in the hit at 'the sharers' (Act V), and the culmination of malice is reached in a diatribe on Post-haste-Shakespeare, not because he acts in plays, but because he writes them: O age, when every Scrivener's boy shall dip Profaning quills into Thessalia's spring ; When every artist prentice, that can read The pleasant pantry of conceits, shall dare T o write as confident as Hercules; When every ballad-monger boldly writes, And windy froth of bottle-ale doth fill Their purest organ of invention— Yet all applauded and puffed up with pride, Swell in conceit, and load the stage with stuff Raked from the rotten embers of stall jests ; Which basest lines best please the vulgar sense, Make truest rapture lose preeminence.

Clout (fellow-player of Post-haste) answers : Farewell the muses, poor poet, adieu! When we have need, 't may be we'll send for you.

There remain in Histriomastix two minor correspondences. Post-haste does a prologue and epilogue extempore. The latter is "as follows: The glass is run, our play is done : Hence, time doth call, we thank you all.

The concluding verses in the epilogue to Twelfth Night are ; But that's all one, our play is done, And we'll strive to please you every day.

Post-haste's fellows commend his extempores thus: I never heard happier stuff. Here's no new luxury or blandishment, But plenty of Old England's mother words.

During the early career of Post-haste the company is summoned to Lord Mavortius, who is ' disposed to hear what they can do.' The lord's usher asks, ' W h a t plays have you ?'

SHAKESPEARE, Belch. Post-haste. Usher. Post-haste. Usher. Post-haste.

BURLESQUED.

2 87

Here's a gentleman-scholar writes for us. I pray, Master Post-haste, declare for our credits. For mine own part, [through] this summer season, I am desperate of a horse. ' T i s well. But what plays have you ? A gentleman's a gentleman that hath a clean Shirt on, with some learning. And so have I. One of you answer the names of your plays. Mother Gurton's Needle (a tragedy), etc.

It is evident that these replies were intended to convey more meaning to the audience than the usher found in them. Posthaste is naming plays of his own, using- some stage hit for describing them. The second seems uncertain, but the first is probably Richard 3: ' A horse! a horse! my kingdom for a horse!' 1 In the first scenes of Histriomastix, before the days of 'stalking high,' Post-haste's is a travelling company. Besides we that travel, with pumps full of gravel, Made all of such running leather, That once in a week new masters we seek, And never can hold together.

Sonnet 50 has frequently been explained by Shakespeare's travels with his company: How heavy do I journey on the w a y ! T h e beast that bears me, tired with my woe, Plods dully on. The bloody spur cannot provoke him on That sometimes anger thrusts into his hide, Which heavily he answers with a groan.

Sonnet 51 calls the same beast 'a jade.' In the Poetaster (III, 1) Captain Tucca advises Histrio to employ a 'gentleman, whose father was a man of worship,' to write plays for him. This 'parcel-poet' can be no other than Marston, who, under the name of Crispinus, is the butt of the play. He will teach Histrio to 'tear and rand,' for 'he pens high, lofty, in a new stalking strain.' If Histrio will give him forty shillings earnest money, he will write (plays) for him.2 ' If he ' C f . Marston's Scourge of Villainy, V I I , I ; What Vou Will, I I , I, 126. Under date 28th September, 1599, Henslowe records in his Diary that he l e n t ' unto Mr. Maxton, the hew poete [Marston], the sum of forty shillings,' in earnest of an unnamed play. 2

288

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

pen for thee once, thou shalt not need to travel with thy pumps full of gravel any more, after a blind jade and a hamper, and stalk upon boards and barrel heads to an old cracked trumpet.' 1 Tucca condescendingly promises to have the Statute repealed for Histrio. Marston, in Histriomastix, calls Post-haste and his company 'proud Statute rogues.' 2 In the Poetaster, Histrio is called a proud player, who has 'Fortune and the good year' on his side. In Histriomastix, Chrisoganus (Marston) offers a play to Post-haste's company for £io, and his offer is refused. He retorts as follows: Ye scraps of wit, base echoes of our voice, T a k e heed ye stumble not with stalking high, T h o u g h F o r t u n e reel with strong prosperity. I hope to see you starve and storm for books (plays); A n d in the dearth of rich invention, W h e n sweet, smooth lines are held for precious, T h e n will you fawn and crouch to poesy.

This is the dilemma out of which Marston, in the Poetaster, is to extricate Histrio. In Histriomastix the confident players anticipate no such necessity, 'while goosequillian Post-haste holds a pen.' Histrio is made to say, in the Poetaster: ' W e have as much ribaldry in our plays as can be, as you would wish, captain. All the sinners in the suburbs come and applaud our action daily.' The purpose of Histriomastix, as was observed above, is to veil the envy of play-writers lacking patronage beneath a virtuous protest against corrupt plays. Chrisoganus (again Marston) rails thus at Post-haste's company: W r i t e on, crie on, yawle to the common sort Of thick-skinn'd auditors such rotten stuffs, More fit to fill the paunch of Esquiline T h a n feed the hearings of judicial ears.

In the scene from the Poetaster already cited, Captain Tucca, having offered to secure the parcel-poet's (Marston's) services, ' C f . T h e U n t r u s s i n g of the Humorous P o e t : ' T h o u (Horace-Jonson) call'st Demetrius (Dekker) journeyman poet, but thou put'st up a supplication to be a poor journeyman player, and had'st been still so, but that thou could'st not put a good face upon't. T h o u hast forgot how thou amblest in leather pilch by a play wagon, in the high way, and took'st mad J e r o n i m o ' s part, to get service among the Mimics.' 2 Cf. Poetaster, I, I : ' T h e y are grown licentious, the rogues ; libertines, flat libertines. T h e y forget they are in the Statute, the rascals.'

SHAKESPEARE,

BURLESQUED.

289

p r o c e e d s to m a k e H i s t r i o a d m i r e s o m e atrocious dramatic recitation. Histrio is quite in the situation of Pistol, in H e n r y 5, w h e n F l u e l l e n m a k e s him eat the leek. O n e of the elegant e x t r a c t s with which he is r e g a l e d is u n d o u b t e d l y Pistol's o w n : W h y , then lament therefore: damned be thy guts U n t o K i n g Plutos H e l l , and princely E r e b u s ; F o r sparrows must have food.

T h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g scenes a n d p a s s a g e s in S h a k e s p e a r e are e x t r e m e l y characteristic of Pistol, and not concordance-culls, to parallel Jonson. I'll see her damned first, to Plutos damned lake ; b y this h a n d ! to the infernal deep, with E r e b u s and tortures vile a l s o . — 2 H e n r y 4, I I , 4. W h y then lament t h e r e f o r e . — 2 H e n r y 4, V , 3. Y o u n g ravens must have f o o d . — M e r r y W i v e s , I, 3.

A s the Poetaster must h a v e been written after Histriomastix, these c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s are r e m a r k a b l e . Marston, under an a s s u m e d a n d then u n d e r an enforced disguise, is anxious to write for Histrio in both plays, and in b o t h his offer is rejected. In the Poetaster he will teach Histrio h o w to ' t e a r and rand,' while in H i s t r i o m a s t i x he has already caricatured Histrio's p l a y s in m e r e rant. E x a m p l e s of this style are then g i v e n in the Poetaster, one of w h i c h is now s h o w n to be d e r i v e d from the v e r y g r o u p of plays a n d characters w h i c h are the objects of ridicule in Histriomastix. Histrio, in the Poetaster, is the P l a y e r W h i p p e d o v e r again, with a coarse but j o v i a l ' I told y o u s o ' a d d e d . A n d , finally, t h e H i s t r i o of both p l a y s a p p e a r s t o be a caricature of S h a k e s p e a r e . 1 1 It seems hardly necessary to do more than refer to the old statement, repeated by C. H . H e r f o r d in his biographical account of B e n Jonson, that the Histrio of the Poetaster is P h i l i p H e n s l o w e . T h e r e is no proof, and no likelihood, that the illiterate p a w n - b r o k i n g dealer in theatrical properties, and trader in poets' necessities, ever spoke a line of verse on the stage. H a d his son-in-law, E d w a r d A l l e y n , been singled out for identification, there would at least have been the excuse that the domimts gregis (the manager) was sometimes styled histrio. B u t A l l e y n also is impossible. ' O f literary ability and tastes, he gives no sign, nor is there any reason to suppose that he had a hand In any of the c l a y s in w h i c h he performed on the s t a g e ' [G. F . W a r n e r in D i e t . N a t . Biog.]. T h e Histrio of both plays, Histriomastix and Poetaster, is a poet-actor. In the former play, Histrio has b e e n shown to be a burlesque of Shakespeare, and the connection b e t w e e n the corresponding scenes in both plays is now seen to be remarkably close. T h e natural and unforced conclusion points to the Histrio of the Poetaster as a companion caricature of the great dramatist.

2gO

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

T h e attack on M a r s t o n in the P o e t a s t e r s e e m s s i m p l e e n o u g h , b e c a u s e B e n J o n s o n has e x p l a i n e d it. M a r s t o n h a d l o n g p r o v o k e d him with his petulant style, and r e c e i v e d his r e w a r d , r i c h l y deserved. B u t the relations between rival c o m p a n i e s a n d c o m peting p l a y w r i g h t s in the eventful y e a r s 1 5 9 8 - 1 6 0 1 a p p e a r t o h a v e b e e n f a r f r o m s i m p l e . M r . F l e a y thinks that the c o m p a n i e s at all f i v e of the L o n d o n theatres w e r e e n g a g e d in contention at this time. 1 I cannot a g r e e with S i m p s o n that H i s t r i o m a s t i x s h o w s a n y traces of J o n s o n ' s h a n d . T h e p l a y as it stands, w h a t e v e r m a y be t h o u g h t of the alternative e n d i n g , a p p e a r s to b e M a r s t o n ' s own. It s e e m s not e v e n to h a v e met with J o n s o n ' s a p p r o v a l , as c o m i n g f r o m M a r s t o n , but it a w a k e n e d a s y m p a t h e t i c c h o r d , as a t t a c k i n g S h a k e s p e a r e f o r the v e r y class of p l a y s w h i c h B e n J o n s o n h a d o p p o s e d in t h o s e m a s t e r - k e y s to his t a l e n t — t h e p r o l o g u e and induction to his t w o p l a y s of H u m o r s , B u t the lure w h i c h the a s p i r i n g and g e n e r o u s - s o u l e d d r a m a t i c artist of 1 6 0 0 v i e w e d ' h i g h and aloof,' to this the m o r e a r r o g a n t l y ambitious a n d intolerant p l a y - w r i t e r of 1 6 1 4 a p p e a r s to h a v e s t o o p e d : a b u r l e s q u e of S h a k e s p e a r e , as m a k e r of interludes and p u p p e t - p l a y s . M a r s t o n h a d included in his H i s t r i o m a s t i x a t r a v e s t y of T r o i l u s a n d C r e s s i d a . T h e second part of this s t u d y will attempt to s h o w that B e n J o n s o n c a r i c a t u r e d the s a m e p l a y in B a r t h o l o m e w F a i r . I I . — T R O I L U S AND CRESSIDA.

B a r t h o l o m e w F a i r w a s first p e r f o r m e d at the H o p e T h e a t r e on the B a n k s i d e , O c t . 3 1 , 1 6 1 4 . In the Induction, the B o o k - h o l d e r ( P r o m p t e r ) informs the audience that the a u t h o r has written the p l a y ' t o the s c a l e of the g r o u n d e d j u d g m e n t s h e r e ' (i. e. of the g r o u n d l i n g s ) . T h e m o t t o p r e f i x e d to the p l a y d e c l a r e s that D e m o c r i t u s w o u l d find f o o d for l a u g h t e r : Scriptores autem narrare putaret asello Fabellam surdo. A s m i g h t b e e x p e c t e d in s u c h a p r o d u c t i o n , full of the e x t r a v a g a n t h u m o r s of the F a i r , the whole of A c t V (one scene e x c e p t e d ) is o c c u p i e d with a p u p p e t - p l a y : T h e A n c i e n t M o d e r n H i s t o r y of H e r o a n d L e a n d e r , otherwise called the T o u c h s t o n e of true l o v e , with as true a trial of f r i e n d s h i p between D a m o n and P y t h i a s , t w o faithful f r i e n d s of the B a n k s i d e . S h a k e s p e a r e ' s T r o i l u s a n d 1

Chronicle History, p. 119.

SHAKESPEARE,

BURLESQUED.

29I

C r e s s i d a has a r e m a r k a b l y similar title: T h e F a m o u s H i s t o r y of T r o y l u s and C r e s s e i d . E x c e l l e n t l y e x p r e s s i n g the b e g i n n i n g of their l o v e s , with the conceited w o o i n g of P a n d a r u s , P r i n c e of Licia. T h e simpleton in J o n s o n ' s p l a y , B a r t h o l o m e w C o k e s , is m a d e to e x p r e s s the a u t h o r ' s m o c k i n g opinion of s u c h a title. 'Pretty i ' f a i t h ; what's the m e a n i n g o n ' t ? Is't an enterlude, or w h a t is i t ? ' T h e fate of T r o i l u s and C r e s s i d a in the F o l i o of 1 6 2 3 m a k e s this c o x c o m b ' s criticism r e a d like a p r o p h e t i c piece of i r o n y . It stands there alone, s h o u l d e r e d out of the t r a g e d i e s and finding n o place in the c o m e d i e s or h i s t o r i e s ; it r e c e i v e d no p a g i n g a n d w a s omitted f r o m the table of contents. M o d e r n critics h a v e t h o u g h t that the p l a y b e l o n g s rather to c o m e d y than t r a g e d y . T h e editors of the F o l i o of 1 6 2 3 s e e m not to h a v e k n o w n w h e r e to p l a c e i t ; C o k e ' s question in the M o t i o n a p p e a r s to h a v e t r o u b l e d them a l s o : ' W h a t ' s the m e a n i n g o n ' t ? Is't an enterlude, o r what is it ? ' T h e p u p p e t - s h o w m a n in B a r t h o l o m e w F a i r , the m o u t h of his p u p p e t s , is, like all the rest, the m o u t h of J o n s o n ' s s a t i r e ; h e thus Sums u p his l o n g e x p e r i e n c e : ' O the Motions that I L a n t h o r n L e a t h e r h e a d have g i v e n light to, in my time, since my master P o d d i e d !

J e r u s a l e m w a s a stately thing and so w a s

N i n e v e h , a n d the city of N o r w i c h , a n d S o d o m and G o m o r r a h , with the rising of the prentices, and p u l l i n g down

the b a w d y - h o u s e s

there

upon

Shrove

T u e s d a y : but the G u n p o w d e r plot, there was a g e t - p e n n y ! . . .

Y o u r home-

born projects prove e v e r the best, they are so easy and f a m i l i a r .

T h e y put too

much l e a r n i n g in their things n o w - a - d a y s , a n d that I f e a r w i l l be the spoil of this. 1

Littlewit.

I say, M i c k l e w i t ! if not too m i c k l e . '

T h e author of the motion, thus s u m m o n e d , a p p e a r s , and L e a t h e r h e a d ( p u p p e t - s h o w m a n ) , C o k e s (a rich fool) and the a u t h o r Littlewit e x p l a i n the merits of the p i e c e in the following d i a l o g u e : Cokes.

B u t do you p l a y it a c c o r d i n g to the printed b o o k ?

I have r e a d that.

Leatherhead. B y no m e a n s , sir. Cokes. N o ? H o w t h e n ? Leath. A better w a y , s i r ; that is too l e a r n e d and poetical for our audience. W h a t do they k n o w w h a t ' H e l l e s p o n t ' i s , ' g u i l t y of true love's b l o o d ' ? or what ' A b y d o s ' is, or, ' t h e other, Sestos h i g h t ' ? Cokes.

T h o u art in the r i g h t ; I do not k n o w m y s e l f .

Leath. N o , I h a v e entreated M a s t e r L i t t l e w i t to take a little pains to reduce it to a more f a m i l i a r strain for our people. Cokes.

H o w , I p r a y thee, good M a s t e r L i t t l e w i t ? 1

T h e usual ironical gird at S h a k e s p e a r e .

292

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

Littlewit. It pleases him to make a matter of it, sir; but there is no such matter, I assure you. I have only made it a little easy and modern for the times, sir, that's all. As for the Hellespont, I imagine our Thames here, etc.

T h e lines ' O n Hellespont, guilty of true love's blood,'and ' t h e one Abydos, the other Sestos hight,' are of course Marlowe's; they are the opening verses in his H e r o and Leander. Marlowe's sestiads were here held up by Ben Jonson as an example of classical taste, rather than as a modern work of a r t : the perfect foil of a Greek gem. They were to be recalled by all who could recognize the first lines of the famous poem, while listening to a burlesque of Shakespeare. T h e studied and elaborate puppetmachinery was not invented for the purpose of extinguishing a John Littlewit. It is Shakespeare and his art that are the objects of merry-seeming but deeply-meditated Condottieri warfare. But Jonson has heightened the comic effect and made good his means of escape from the charge of a wanton attack, by substituting the fable of Hero and Leander for that of Troilus and Cressida. T h e plot of the puppet-play seems to have been suggested by Shakespeare, in a speech of Troilus (1, 1): But Pandarus,—O gods, how do you plague me ! I cannot come to Cressid but by Pandar; And he's as tetchy to be woo'd to woo, As she is stubborn-chaste against all suit. Tell me, Apollo, for thy Daphne's love, What Cressid is, what Pandar, and what we? Her bed is India; there she lies, a pearl: Between our Ilium and where she resides, Let it be call'd the wild and wandering flood, Ourself the merchant, and this sailing Pandar Our doubtful hope, our convoy and our bark.

This is one of several instances in the puppet-play where the humor lies in an Eulenspiegel-like, literal interpretation of Shakespeare's metaphors. T h e situation is then seen to be exactly similar to that imagined by Troilus. T h e 'wild and wandering flood' becomes the river Thames, as easily as Littlewit imagined that river for the toiling Hellespont. Leander now crosses to Hero, not by swimming, but ferried over—a situation not likely to have been invented independently of Troilus' speech. T o find the ' sailing Pandar,' the text of the first scene of the motion must now be examined : Gentles, that no longer your expectations may wander, Behold our chief actor, amorous Leander.

SHAKESPEARE,

Lean. Leath.

BURLESQUED.

293

With a great deal of cloth, lapp'd about him like a scarf, For he yet serves his father, a dyer at Puddle-wharf; Which place we'll make bold with, to call it our Abydus, A s the Bankside is our Sestos ; and let it not be deny'd us. Now as he is beating to make the dye take the fuller, W h o chances to come by, but fair Hero in a sculler ; And seeing Leander's naked leg and goodly calf, Cast at him from the boat a sheep's eye and a half. Now she is landed, and the sculler come back, By and by you shall see what Leander doth lack. Cole, Cole, old Cole! That is the sculler's name without controul.

Lean. W h y Cole, I say, C o l e ! Leath. Is't the sculler you need ? Lean. A y , and be hang'd. Leath. Stay, sculler. Cole. What say you ? Leath. You must stay for Leander And carry him to the wench. Cole. You rogue, I am no pander. T h e term 'old coal' meant a pander. an ancient

In Marston's

m e m b e r o f t h a t g u i l d , in c o m p a n y

Malcontent

with two

young

w o m e n , is s a l u t e d t h u s : Malevole. Old coal! Maquerelle. Old coal! Malevole. A y , old coal! methinks thou liest like a brand under these billets of green wood. He that will inflame a young wench's heart, let him lay close to her an old coal that hath first been fired, a panderess, my half-burnt lint, who though thou canst not flame thyself, yet art able to set a thousand virgins' tapers afire. J o n s o n h i n t s t h i s m e a n i n g b r o a d l y in t h e r e p l y o f L e a t h e r h e a d t o C o l e ' s ' I am

no p a n d e r ' : ' A r e y o u no pander, g o o d m a n

H e r e ' s no m a n s a y s y o u are. And

B a r t h o l o m e w C o k e s adds, to g i v e the allusion m o r e

' H e s a y s h e is n o p a n d e r . now.'

Cole?

Y o u ' l l g r o w a h o t c o a l , it s e e m s . ' point:

' T i s a fine l a n g u a g e ; I u n d e r s t a n d it

A f t e r an animated scuffle between L e a t h e r h e a d and

old

C o l e , the latter r o w s L e a n d e r to the landing w h e n c e H e r o

has

b e t a k e n herself to an inn.

C o l e is n o s t r a n g e r t o t h e

situation,

for from G r e e n e ' s Q u i p for an upstart Courtier w e learn that

the

services of w a t e r m e n w e r e often required for such excursions u p the Thames.1 The

second

encounter

in

the

puppet-play

now

claims

attention: 'Greene's Works (Huth Lib.), ed. Grosart, vol. II, pp. 270-1.

our

294

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

Now, gentles, I take it here is none of you so stupid, But that you have heard of a little god called C u p i d ; W h o out of kindness to Leander, hearing he but saw her, This present day and hour doth turn himself to a drawer. A n d because he would have their first meeting to be merry, H e strikes H e r o in love to him with a pint of sherry; W h i c h he tells her from amorous L e a n d e r is sent her, W h o after him into the room of H e r o doth venture.

Cupid's complaisant metamorphosis results from the distortion of one of Troilus' eager figures of speech. Troilus and Pandarus meet by appointment in the orchard, and Pandarus asks, ' Have you seen my cousin ?' Troilus replies: No, Pandarus : I stalk about her door, Like a strange soul upon the Stygian banks Staying for waftage. O, be thou my Charon, And give me swift transportance to those fields W h e r e I may wallow in the lily-beds Proposed for the deserver! O gentle Pandarus, F r o m Cupid's shoulder pluck his p a i n t e d wings, And fly with me to Cressid!

' C h a r o n ' is used by Ben Jonson for a Thames-waterman, in his anti-epic, the Famous Voyage ; but this opportunity of satirizing Troilus' rhetoric had already been taken advantage of in the character of old Cole; and he, being only available for the journey by water, has made his exit. Our author now seizes upon the second excited metaphor, O gentle Pandarus, F r o m Cupid's shoulder pluck his painted wings, A n d fly with me to Cressid,

and turns it into the most forbidding prose situation. Pandarus forthwith becomes a drawer (room-waiter and tapster) in the very suspicious inn where Hero is, and henceforward he is called Cupid. Leander (Troilus) waits outside, while Pandarus carries to H e r o (Cressida) Troilus' treat of a pint of sherry, W h i c h he tells her from amorous L e a n d e r is sent her.

In puppet-plays 'it was the fashion for the puppets of the text to introduce themselves to strangers with a propitiatory cup of wine, which preceded their appearance.' 1 This was called a token. T h e situation travesties a conversation between Pandarus and 1

Gifford's note.

SHAKESPEARE,

BURLESQUED.

295

Cressida about the gift Troilus is to send to his 'stubborn-chaste' mistress. Pan. I'll be with you, niece, by and by. Cres. T o bring, uncle ? Pan. Ay, a token from Troilus. [Exit. Cres. By the same token, you are a bawd.

Leander then follows Pandarus into Hero's room, and the scene continues: This while young Leander with fair Hero is drinking, And Hero grown drunk to any man's thinking. Yet was it not three pints of sherry could flaw her, Till Cupid, distinguish'd like Jonas the drawer From under his apron, where his lechery lurks, Put love in her sack. Now mark how it works.

T h e three pints of sherry are suggested in the puppet-play as a suitable means for overcoming Cressida's 'holding off' from Troilus in the drama. She says : Women are angels, wooing : Things won are done, joy's soul lies in the doing. Therefore this commandment out of love I teach,— Achievement is command ; ungain'd, beseech.

In the same way Cupid's final shot is intended to explain Cressida's sudden change of front, from chaste blushes to forwardness: Boldness comes to me now, and brings me heart;— Prince Troilus, I have loved you night and day, For many weary months.

Troilus' rejoinder, ' W h y was my Cressid then so hard to win?,' voices every reader's feeling and Jonson's merry incredulity. His own version of Cressida's change of mood is in the spirit of Pandarus' exhortation, ' S h a m e is a b a b y ' : Hero. Leander.

O Leander, Leander, my dear, my dear Leander, I'll forever be thy goose, so thou'lt be my gander. And. sweetest of geese, before X go to bed, I'll swim over the Thames, my goose, thee to tread.

This is a perversion of Pandarus' gloating pride in his niece: ' Nay, you shall fight your hearts out, ere I part you. T h e falcon as the tercel, for all the ducks i' the river'; which Staunton thus explains: ' t h e falcon (the female hawk) I'll wager to be as good

296

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

as the tercel (the male h a w k ) ; in other words, I'll back my niece to be as staunch at that g a m e as Troilus.' In the light of the passage in the text, Pandarus' commendation of the pair as ' s w e e t d u c k s ' raises such a common appellation to the rank of corroborative evidence. In the same scene Cressida s a y s : I was won, my lord, With the first glance that ever—pardon me ;— If I confess much you will play the tyrant.

W e have seen this first glance parodied in the induction of the puppet-play: Who chanced to come by but fair Hero in a sculler; And seeing Leander's naked leg and goodly calf, Cast at him from the boat a sheep's eye and a half.

In Troilus and Cressida the scene now changes to the Grecian camp, but in the puppet-play the new characters D a m o n and Pythias appear at the inn. U p to this point the G r e e k ideal of romantic love has been travestied, in a vulgar L e a n d e r and baser Hero, and it will now perhaps be more readily conceded that Ben Jonson ridiculed the modern ideal of love and constane)', R o m e o and Juliet, in his Poetaster ( I V , 7). T h e scene in the puppet-play now does for the pair symbolizing G r e e k friendship what our author has already done for the lovers. His ironical title, ' T h e Ancient Modern History of H e r o and Leander, otherwise called the Touchstone of true love, with as faithful a trial of friendship between Damon and Pythias,' now receives its application for the second part. T h e r e is in Troilus and Cressida, it is true, no D a m o n and Pythias, as there is no H e r o and Leander. But the most sacred obligations are set at naught by Diomed towards Cressida, whom Troilus is obliged to entrust to his keeping, as hostage. Troilus' youthful proffer of a truce between himself and Diomed, when Cressida is named, is put b y , — D i o m e d meanwhile vaunting his spirit and his honor. Further considerations needed to establish the identity of Troilus and Diomed with Pythias and Damon will be deferred until the correspondences have added their weight. First, the puppet-play: Now, gentles, to the friends who in number are two, And lodged in that ale-house in which fair Hero does do,

SHAKESPEARE,

BURLESQUED.

29 7

D a m o n , for some kindness done him last w e e k , I s come, fair H e r o in Fish-street this morning to seek. Pythias doth smell the k n a v e r y of the meeting, A n d now you shall see their true-friendly greeting.

This is plainly act V , scene 2 in Troilus and Cressida, adapted to the purpose of the puppet-play. Troilus, at night, before the tent of Calchas, listens to the knavery of the meeting between Cressida and Diomed, wrenches himself loose from his passion for the 'revolted fair,' and meditates revenge. In the puppetplay a grand final disturbance ensues in the booth, in which all the characters are involved, Leander among them. But this is not surprising; Uhland and Justinus Kerner exercise similar liberties in their Schattenspiele. But Jonson avoids any dialogue between the doubles, Leander and Pythias, while Damon and Leander bandy words and blows freely. T h e conflicts between Troilus and Diomed in the play naturally offer no analogies to the puppet-dialogue, but Thersites more than answers every claim. In act V , scene 4, if looked at from Jonson's point of view, Thersites undertakes the part of master of the puppets towards Diomed and Troilus, giving all the explanations to the audience, and seeming with his asides to urge on either combatant. Thersites' epithets have supplied Jonson—himself a master at railing—with his whole arsenal for this scene. Several of the correspondences, though unusual, are exact, but they are in general extremely coarse. One instance, however, as having a special significance, I beg leave to cite. Thersites says of Diomed (V, 1), 'they say he keeps a Trojan d r a b ' ; and later on (V, 4), ' I would fain see them meet; that that same young Trojan ass, that loves the whore there, might send that Greekish whoremasterly villain . . . back to the dissembling luxurious drab.' But Leatherhead, who here answers to Thersites, says to the puppets Pythias and Damon : ' I say, between you, you have but one drab.' It will be remembered that Damon and Pythias are called, in the title of the puppet-play, ' t w o faithful friends of the Bankside.' This led several critics to suspect that Jonson might be referring to Shakespeare's sonnets, or to circumstances connected with them. Dowden mentions the matter, referring to Elze's William Shakespeare, which I have not seen. Thomas Tyler, in his edition of the sonnets, goes so far as to say 'that to Jonson probably the main facts concerning Shakespeare and his friend, and the dark lady (of the sonnets) would be known, even if such

298

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

knowledge were not widely diffused among the general public.' T h e question whether Jonson meant Shakespeare and his friend, in the sneer referred to above, lies beyond the scope of this study. But if it has now become probable that he attacked Shakespeare in such a vital way through Troilus and Cressida, a drama that reflects the mood and the diction of the sonnets, and which appears to rest upon the same basis of Shakespeare's personal history, it is obvious that the whole matter enters upon a new and interesting phase. In the puppet-play Leander is described as Beating to make the dye take the fuller, For he yet serves his father, a dyer at Puddle-wharf.

Troilus, the youngest son, sits at 'Priam's royal table' and there buries his 'sigh in wrinkle of a smile,' 'lest Hector or my father should perceive me.' H e desires that Paris and Helen shall make his excuse, 'if the king call for him at supper.' There is naturally some temptation to make the 'dyer's son about Puddlewharf' refer to Sonnet 1 1 1 , in which Shakespeare, addressing his friend, repines at his odious public calling as a player: Thence comes it that my name receives a brand, And almost thence my nature is subdued To what it works in, like the dyer's hand.

T h e same literal perversion of figures of speech, as that on which Jonson relied for the caricature of Troilus, might conceivably have been active here, in wresting awry almost the only passage in which Shakespeare is known to have told the world of his life, in his own name. But the explanation, should it be found, may turn out to be more simple. W a s Puddle-wharf a dyers' neighborhood, and does Jonson fasten this calling upon Leander (Troilus) for the sake of the 'great deal of cloth, lapp'd about him like a scarf' ? Cressida's sleeve, which Troilus wears, had already helped out Marston's parody in Histriomastix : Troilus.

Come Cressida, my cresset light. Thy face doth shine both day and night. Behold, behold thy garter blue Thy knight his [Qy. on?] valiant elbow wears, That when he shakes his furious spear The foe in shivering fearful sort May lay him down in death to snort.

SHAKESPEARE, Cressida.

BURLESQUED.

299

O k n i g h t , w i t h valor in thy face, H e r e take my skreene, w e a r it for g r a c e ; W i t h i n thy h e l m e t put the same, T h e r e w i t h to m a k e thine e n e m i e s lame.

B u t if t h e ' d y e r ' s s o n ' s t i l l resists any c o m p l e t e l y satisfactory explanation, the hint c o n v e y e d in ' P u d d l e - w h a r f ' is plain. In the m o n t h of M a r c h , 1 6 1 2 - 1 3 , S h a k e s p e a r e b o u g h t a house, with g r o u n d attached, near to the Blackfriars T h e a t r e , ' a b u t t i n g u p o n a streete l e a d i n g d o w n to P u d l e W h a r f f e on the east part, right against the K i n g e s Majesties w a r d r o b e . ' 1 Rossiter's Theatre in the B l a c k f r i a r s ( 1 6 1 5 ) w a s called the ' p l a y h o u s e in P u d d l e W h a r f . ' 2 It is therefore safe to c o n c l u d e that this locality in H e r o and L e a n d e r means old Blackfriars, the B u r b a d g e - S h a k e s p e a r e theatre. A n y further pursuit of the question of personal criticism, in the p u p p e t - p l a y , is beset with difficulties. W i t h the real S h a k e s p e a r e s h r o u d e d from view, all e v i d e n c e of this kind must remain in s o m e m e a s u r e s h a d o w y . B u t Jonson is chiefly c o n c e r n e d with S h a k e s p e a r e ' s art, and here it s e e m s not impossible to detect and follow the course of his raillery. In the p r e c e d i n g p a g e s the a t t e m p t has been m a d e to trace out in some detail his m e t h o d of r e c k o n i n g with S h a k e s p e a r e for the ' A n c i e n t M o d e r n H i s t o r y ' of T r o i l u s and Cressida. But at this point the p u p p e t - p l a y caricature was e x p a n d e d to include another p l a y of S h a k e s p e a r e , the outlines of w h i c h are now discernible in the satire. HENRY WOOD. 1

Staunton's P r e f a c e , xliii.

2Fleay,

C h r o n i c l e H i s t o r y , pp. 263-4.