GEORGE GASCOIGNE.

221

before I proceed to their consideration, it will be well to pass this chapter in the literary history of our Drama in rapid review, and to notice some of its more prominent personalities.

George Gascoigne was a gentleman by birth and education, a member of Gray's Inn, and the author of many excellent works in prose and verse. In the year 1566, the society of which he was a member performed two of his dramatic essays in their hall of Gray's Inn. These were a translation of Ariosto's 'Suppositi,' and a version of Lodovico Dolce's 'Giocasta.' The first of these plays has special interest, since it was the earliest known comedy in English prose. The Jocasta has hitherto been accepted by historians of our Drama, following Collier's authority, as a free transcript from the Phoenissæ' of Euripides. This it is in substance. But critics have

generally omitted to notice that before the Phonissæ came into the hands of Gascoigne, it had passed through those of Dolce. There is no reason to suppose that Gascoigne was a learned poet; and the merit of having adapted a tragedy from the Greek must, I think, be denied him. If Collier had paid attention to his own quotations from 'Jocasta,' the point would have been clear. He extracts the speech of a person named Bailo at the opening of the first act. Bailo is the Italian translation of the Greek word Paidagogos; and what this Bailo says in English, is a tolerably close rendering of Dolce's addition to the tutor's part in the 'Phoenissæ' of Euripides. Again, in the speech of the Messenger, Gascoigne follows Dolce, where Dolce has

1 See Teatro Antico Italiano, vol. vi. for Dolce's Giocasta.

departed from Euripides. My excuse for insisting upon so insignificant a matter, must be that this 'Jocasta' is the only early English play for which a Greek source has been claimed. The truth appears to be that, like the rest of the classical dramas of that period, it had an Italian derivation.1

IV.

The study of Seneca made itself apparent in two tragedies by Fulke Grevile, Lord Brooke. These are 'Alaham' and 'Mustapha ;'-Oriental fables treated in the strictest pseudo-classic style, with conscientious observance of the unities and other rules for depriving tragedy of movement. A ghost of one of the old kings of Ormus prologises in 'Alaham.' A Chorus of Good and Evil Spirits, Furies and Vices, comments on the action. In Mustapha' the Chorus varies: at one time it consists of Pashas and Cadis; then of Mohammedan Priests; again of Time and Eternity; lastly, of Converts to Mohammedanism. These plays, though printed in Brooke's works as late as 1633, were certainly composed at a much earlier period. It is curious that both are written in elaborate rhymed structure. They had no influence over the development of the English Drama, and must be regarded in the light of ponderous literary studies.

Upon the close of the century, Samuel Daniel, the sweet lyrist of Delia, set himself in opposition to the current of popular taste; and blaming 'the idle fictions' and 'gross follies' with which men abused their leisure

It ought in this connection to be noted that the Plutus of Aristophanes is said to have been performed in Greek before Queen Elizabeth.

LORD BROOKE AND DANIEL.

223

hours, produced two tragedies, 'Philotas' and 'Cleopatra,' to serve as patterns of a purer style. Both, in the opinion of impartial critics, are apparent failures. They resemble a dilettante's disquisitions upon tragic fables rather than tragedies for action. Daniel, in his determination not to violate the unities, confines himself to the last hours of Cleopatra's life; and rather than disturb the ceremonious decorum of his art, he introduces a Messenger who relates in polished phrases how she died. A better instance could not be chosen than this Cleopatra,' to prove the impotence in England of the pseudo-classic style. Daniel's tragedy bore points of strong resemblance to the work of contemporary French playwrights. But it hardly needed the fierce light from Cleopatra's dying hours in Shakspere's play to pale its ineffectual fires. Where Italian and French poets attained to moderate success in their imitation of antique art, English dramatists invariably failed. Their failure was due in no small measure, doubtless, to the fact that their attempt revealed an undramatic turn of mind. In the age of Elizabeth and James the born playwright felt instinctively, felt truly, that the path of Shakspere and the people was the only path to walk in. Daniel's 'Cleopatra' met with the lukewarm approval of a lettered audience. His Philotas' was badly received, not on account of its artistic faults apparently, but because the audience recognised in its catastrophe allusions to the fate of Essex.

Daniel, in sympathy with the French authors whom probably he had in view, adhered to rhyme The Countess of Pembroke, who translated Garnier's

'Antony' into English as early as 1590, made some use of blank verse-a somewhat noticeable fact, since Marlowe's 'Tamburlaine,' which heralded the triumph of that metre, was first printed in the same year. Another tragedy of Garnier's, the 'Cornelia,' was translated by Thomas Kyd, and dedicated in 1594 to the Countess of Sussex. It is also in blank verse, of vigorous quality. It would serve no purpose to enlarge upon these essays in translation, or to do more than mention Brandon's 'Virtuous Octavia.' They are only interesting as indicating a continuous revolt among the literary folk in England against the prevalent and overwhelming influence of the romantic or the native English drama. Doomed to failure, buried beneath the magna moles of the work of mightier poets, the historian of literature regards them only as exceptions and abortions, indicating by their very failure the organic strength and soundness of the growth which they attempted to displace.

The same judgment may be passed on numerous tragedies in the Latin tongue, and performed at Universities before a courtly audience. The titles and dates of these productions are in some cases curious. Thus we find a 'Jephtha' by George Christopherson, dedicated in 1546 to Henry VIII. It preceded George Buchanan's 'Jephtha' by eight years. A 'Dido,' by John Rightwise, was exhibited in King's College Chapel at Cambridge in 1564 before Queen Elizabeth. Another Dido,' by William Gager, entertained a Polish prince in Christ Church Hall at Oxford in 1583. An Ajax Flagellifer,' adapted probably from Sophocles, was written and got

up for Queen Elizabeth's amusement at Cambridge in 1564. For some reason, its performance had then to be abandoned; but it was played at Oxford in 1605. The Roxana' of William Alabaster, which was acted in Trinity College Hall, at Cambridge, about 1592, and printed in 1632, deserves notice for the praise conferred upon its author by Fuller; also for an anecdote which relates that during one of its performances a gentlewoman went mad on hearing the words sequar, sequar, uttered in a tone of tragic horror. The following titles, chosen pretty much at random -Adrastus Parentans,' Machiavellus,' ' Lælia,' 'Leander,' Fatum Vortigerni,' 'Emilia,' 'Sapientia Salomonis'—prove that the Latin playwrights went far and wide afield for subjects. Should any student have the patience to search our libraries for the MSS. of these compositions, many of which are known to be still extant, it is probable that he would find the influence of Seneca ascendant in them. What the scholars of the sixteenth century seem to have understood by classical dramatic theory, was a deduction from the practice of the Roman rhetorician, with the further application of imperfectly apprehended canons of unity derived from Italian commentaries on Aristotle's 'Poetics.' Gian Giorgio Trissino has more than any single man to answer for the growth of that quaint formalism which imposed itself on the Italian theatre, and found illustrious expression in the work of Racine and his followers. A more intelligent and sympathetic study of the Attic tragedians on the part of the Italian humanists might have saved modern Europe from a mass of errors which crept into that pedantic system.

Q