The characters of these three great masters of English poetry are
sketched by Fuller, in his "Worthies of England." It is a literary
morsel that must not be passed by. The criticisms of those who lived in
or near the times when authors flourished merit our observation. They
sometimes elicit a ray of intelligence, which later opinions do not
always give.
He observes on SPENSER--"The many _Chaucerisms_ used (for I will not say
affected by him) are thought by the ignorant to be _blemishes_, known by
the learned to be _beauties_, to his book; which, notwithstanding, had
been more SALEABLE, if more conformed to our modern language."
On JONSON.--"His parts were not so ready _to run of themselves_, as able
to answer the spur; so that it may be truly said of him, that he had an
_elaborate wit_, wrought out by his own industry.--He would _sit silent_
in learned company, and suck in (_besides wine_) their several humours
into his observation. What was _ore_ in _others_, he was able to
_refine_ himself.
"He was paramount in the dramatic part of poetry, and taught the stage
an exact conformity to the laws of comedians. His comedies were above
the _Volge_ (which are only tickled with downright obscenity), and took
not so well at the _first stroke_ as at the _rebound_, when beheld the
second time; yea, they will endure reading so long as either ingenuity
or learning are fashionable in our nation. If his latter be not so
spriteful and vigorous as his first pieces, all that are old will, and
all who desire to be old should, excuse him therein."
On SHAKSPEARE.--"He was an eminent instance of the truth of that rule,
_poëta non fit, sed nascitur_; one is not made, but born a poet. Indeed
his _learning_ was but very little; so that as _Cornish diamonds_ are
not polished by any lapidary, but are pointed and smooth, even as they
are taken out of the earth, so _Nature_ itself was all the _art_ which
was used upon him.
"Many were the _wit-combats_ betwixt him and Ben Jonson, which two I
beheld like a _Spanish great galleon_ and an _English man of war_.
Master _Jonson_ (like the former) was built far higher in learning;
_solid_, but _slow_ in his performances. _Shakspeare_, with an English
man of war, lesser in _bulk_, but lighter in _sailing_, could _turn with
all tides_, and take advantage of _all winds_, by the quickness of his
wit and invention."
Had these "Wit-combats," between Shakspeare and Jonson, which Fuller
notices, been chronicled by some faithful _Boswell_ of the age, our
literary history would have received an interesting accession. A letter
has been published by Dr. Berkenhout relating to an evening's
conversation between our great rival bards, and Alleyn the actor. Peele,
a dramatic poet, writes to his friend Marlow, another poet. The Doctor
unfortunately in giving this copy did not recollect his authority.
"FRIEND MARLOW,
"I never longed for thy companye more than last night: we were all very
merrye at the Globe, where Ned Alleyn did not scruple to affirme
pleasantly to thy friend WILL, that he had stolen his speech about the
qualityes of an actor's excellencye in Hamlet his Tragedye, from
conversations manyfold which had passed between them, and opinyons given
by Alleyn touchinge this subject. SHAKSPEARE did not take this talk in
good sorte; but JONSON put an end to the strife, by wittylie
remarking,--this affaire needeth no contention: you stole it from NED,
no doubt, do not marvel; have you not seen him act times out of number?"
This letter is one of those ingenious forgeries which the late George
Steevens practised on the literary antiquary; they were not always of
this innocent cast. The present has been frequently quoted as an
original document. I have preserved it as an example of _Literary
Forgeries_, and the danger which literary historians incur by such
nefarious practices.