Act I. scene iii. has the characteristics of Shakspere.] It is

identified, not only by several others of the qualities marking the

first scene, but more particularly by the wealth of its allusion, and

by a closeness, directness, and pertinency of reply which Fletcher's

most spirited dialogues do not reach. It presents more than one

exceed[33:1]ingly beautiful climax; a figure which repeatedly occurs in

the play, and is always used with peculiar energy.

SCENE--_Before the Gates of Athens.--Enter Perithous, Hippolita, and

Emilia._

_Perithous._ No further.

_Hippolita._ Sir, farewell. Repeat my wish|es

To our great lord, of whose success I dare | not

Make any timorous question; yet I wish | him

Excess and overflow of power, an't might | be,

To dure ill-dealing Fortune. Speed to him!

Store never hurts good governors.

[Sidenote: Shakspere metaphor,]

_Perithous._ Though I know

His ocean needs not my poor drops, yet they

Must yield their tribute there. (_To Emilia._) My precious maid,

Those best affections that the heavens infuse

In their _best-tempered pieces_, keep _enthroned_

In your dear heart!

_Emilia._ Thanks, sir! Remember me

To our all royal brother, for whose speed

The great Bellona I'll solicit; and,

Since in our terrene state, petitions are | not,

Without gifts, understood, I'll offer to | her

What I shall be advised she likes. Our hearts

Are in his army, in his tent.

[Sidenote: phrase.]

_Hippolita._ In's bos|om!

We have been soldiers, and we cannot weep

When our friends don their helms or put to sea,

Or tell of babes broacht on the lance, or wom|en

That have sod their infants in (and after eat | them)

The brine they wept at killing them; then if

You stay to see of us such spinsters, we

Should hold you here for ever.

. . . . .

_Emilia._ How his long|ing

Follows his friend!...

Have you observëd him

Since our great lord departed?

_Hippolita._ With much la|bour,

And I did love him for't.[33:2]...

[Sidenote: Female friendship: the description has Shakspere's

characteristics.]

[34:1]The description of female friendship which follows is familiar to

all lovers of poetry. It is disfigured by one or two strained conceits,

and some obscurities arising partly from errors in the text: but the

beauty of the sketch in many parts is extreme, and its character

distinctly that of Shakspeare, vigorous and even quaint, thoughtful and

sometimes almost metaphysical, instinct with animation, and pregnant

with fancy; offering, in short, little resemblance to the manner of any

poet but Shakspeare, and the most unequivocal opposition to Fletcher's.

_Emilia._ Doubtless

There is a best, and reason has no man|ners

To say, it is not you. I was acquaint|ed

Once with a time when I enjoy'd a play|fellow----

You were at wars when she the grave enrich'd,

(Who made too proud the bed,) took leave o' the moon,

Which then look'd pale at parting, when our count

Was each eleven.

_Hippolita._ 'Twas Flavina.

[Sidenote: Shakspere fancy.]

_Emilia._ Yes.

You talk of Perithous' and Theseus' love:

Theirs has more ground, is more maturely seas|oned,

More buckled with strong judgment; and their needs,

The one of the other, may be said to wat|er

Their intertangled roots of love.--But I

And she I sigh and spoke of, were things in|nocent,--

Loved for we did, and,--like the elements,

That know not what nor why, yet do effect

Rare issues by their operance,--our souls

Did so to one another. What she liked,

Was then of me approved; what not, condemned.

No more arraign|ment.| The flower that I would pluck,

And put between my breasts, (then but begin|ning

To swell about the blossom,) she would long

Till she had such another, and commit | it

To the like innocent cradle, where, phoenix-like,

They died in perfume; on my head, no toy

But was her pattern; her affections, (pret|ty,

Though happily her careless wear,) I fol|low'd

For my most serious decking.--Had mine ear

Stolen some new air, or at adventure humm'd

From musical coinage,--why, it was a note

Whereon her spirits would sojourn, rather dwell | on,

And sing it in her slumbers.--This rehears|al

[34:2](Which, every innocent wots well, comes in

Like old importment's bastard) has this end,

That the true love 'tween maid and maid may be

More than in sex dividual....

[Sidenote: Act I. scene iv. Shakspere's.]

The fourth scene is laid in a battle-field near Thebes, and Theseus

enters victorious. The three queens fall down with thanks before him;

and a herald announces the capture of the Two Noble Kinsmen, wounded and

senseless, and scarcely retaining the semblance of life. [Sidenote: Has

Shakspere's words and quibbles.] The phraseology of this short scene is

like Shakspeare's, being brief and energetic, and in one or two

instances passing into quibbles.

[Sidenote: Act I. scene v. is Shakspere's.]

The last scene of this act is of a lyrical cast, and comprised in a few

lamentations spoken by the widowed queens over the corpses of their dead

lords. It ends with this couplet:

The world's a city full of straying streets,

And death's the market-place, where each one meets.

[Sidenote: Act II. not Shakspere's.]

In the Second Act no part seems to have been taken by Shakspeare.

[Sidenote: The prose of II. i. is not from Chaucer,] It commences with

one of those scenes which are introduced into the play in departure from

the narrative of Chaucer, forming an underplot which is clearly the work

of a different artist from many of the leading parts of the drama. The

Noble Kinsmen, cured of their wounds, have been committed to strait and

perpetual prison in Athens, and the first part of this scene is a prose

dialogue between their jailor and a suitor of his daughter. The maiden's

admiration of the prisoners is then exhibited. [Sidenote: and is very

dull: it is not Shakspere's.] You will see afterwards, that there are

several circumstances besides the essential dulness of this prose part,

which fully absolve Shakspeare from the charge of having written it.

[Sidenote: The verse of Act II. scene i.]

The versified portion of this scene, which follows the prose dialogue

among the inferior characters, presents the incident on which the

interest of the story hinges, the commencement of the fatal and

chimerical passion, which, inspiring both the knights towards the young

Emilia, severs the bonds of friendship which had so long held them

together. The noble prisoners are discovered in their turret-chamber,

looking out on the palace-garden, which the lady afterwards enters. They

speak [35:1]in a highly animated strain of that world from which they

are secluded, and find themes of consolation for the hard lot which had

overtaken them. The dialogue is in many respects admirable. [Sidenote:

The verse of Act II. scene i. has the characteristics of Fletcher:

double endings, end-stopt lines, vague images,] It possesses much

eloquence of description, and the character of the language is smooth

and flowing; the versification is good and accurate, frequent in double

endings, and usually finishing the sense with the line; and one or two

allusions occur, which, being favourites of Fletcher's, may be in

themselves a strong presumption of his authorship; the images too have

in some instances a want of distinctness in application or a vagueness

of outline, which could be easily paralleled from Fletcher's

acknowledged writings. [Sidenote: but romantic;] The style is fuller of

allusions than his usually is, but the images are more correct and

better kept from confusion than Shakspeare's; some of them indeed are

exquisite, but rather in the romantic and exclusively poetical tone of

Fletcher, than in the natural and universal mode of feeling which

animates Shakspeare. [Sidenote: slack dialogue.] The dialogue too

proceeds less energetically than Shakspeare's, falling occasionally into

a style of long-drawn disquisition which Fletcher often substitutes for

the quick and dramatic conversations of the great poet. [Sidenote: II.

i. one of the finest scenes that Fletcher ever wrote.] On the whole,

however, this scene, if it be Fletcher's, (of which I have no doubt,) is

among the very finest he ever wrote; and there are many passages in

which, while he preserves his own distinctive marks, he has gathered no

small portion of the flame and inspiration of his immortal friend and

assistant. In the following speeches there are images and phrases, which

are either identically Fletcher's, or closely resemble his, and the

whole cast both of versification and idiom is strictly his:--

[Sidenote: Act II. scene i. Fletcher's.]

_Palamon._ Oh, cousin Ar|cite!

Where is Thebes now? where is our noble coun|try?

Where are our friends and kindreds? Never more

Must we behold those comforts; never see

The hardy youths strive in the games of hon|our,

Hung with the painted favours of their la|dies,

Like tall ships under sail; then start among | them,

And as an east wind leave them all behind | us

Like lazy clouds, while Palamon and Ar|cite,

Even in the wagging of a wanton leg,

Outstript the people's praises, won the gar|lands,

[37:1]Ere they have time to wish them ours. Oh, nev|er

Shall we two exercise, like twins of hon|our,

Our arms again, and feel our fiery hors|es

Like proud seas under us! our good swords now,

(Better the red-eyed god of war ne'er wore,)

Ravish'd our sides, like age must run to rust,

And deck the temples of the gods that hate | us:

These hands shall never draw them out like light|ning

To blast whole armies more.

[Sidenote: Picture fully wrought out.]

[Sidenote: Romantic, pathetic sketch.]

_Arcite._ ...

The sweet embraces of a loving wife,

Loaden with kisses, arm'd with thousand cu|pids,

Shall never clasp our necks: no issue know | us;

No figures of ourselves shall we e'er see,

To glad our age, and like young eagles teach | them

Boldly to gaze against bright arms, and say,

"Remember what your fathers were, and con|quer."

--The fair-eyed maids shall weep our banishments,

And in their songs curse ever-blinded For|tune,

Till she for shame see what a wrong she has done

To youth and Nature.--This is all our world:

We shall know nothing here but one anoth|er,--

Hear nothing but the clock that tells our woes;

The vine shall grow, but we shall never see | it:

Summer shall come, and with her all delights,

But dead-cold winter must inhabit here | still!

_Palamon._ 'Tis too true, Arcite! To our Theban hounds,

That shook the aged forest with their ech|oes,

No more now must we halloo; no more shake

Our pointed javelins, whilst the angry swine

Flies like a Parthian[37:2] quiver from our rag|es,

Struck with our well-steel'd darts....

In this scene there is one train of metaphors which is perhaps as

characteristic of Fletcher as any thing that could be produced.

[Sidenote: Lines from II. i. on page 38, of slow orderly development of

ideas, markt by Fletcher's characteristics.] It is marked by a slowness

of association which he often shews. Several allusions are successively

introduced; but by each, as it appears, we are prepared for and can

anticipate the next; we see the connection of ideas in the poet's mind

through which the one has sprung out of the other, and that all are but

branches, of which one original thought is the root. [Sidenote: No leap

to the end, and off with a fresh bound, like Shakspere.] All this is the

work of [37:3]a less fertile fancy and a more tardy understanding than

Shakspeare's: he would have leaped over many of the intervening steps,

and, reaching at once the most remote particular of the series, would

have immediately turned away to weave some new chain of thought:--

[Sidenote: All workt out thro' every step.]

_Arcite._ ... What worthy bless|ing

Can be, but our imaginatiöns

May make it ours? and here, being thus togeth|er,

We are an endless mine to one anoth|er:

We are one another's wife, ever beget|ting

New births of love; we are fathers, friends, acquaint|ance;

We are, in one another, families;

I am your heir and you are mine; this place

Is our inheritance; no hard oppress|or

Dare take this from us....

But the contentment of the prison is to be interrupted. The fair Emilia

appears beneath, walking in the garden "full of branches green,"

skirting the wall of the tower in which the princes are confined. She

converses with her attendant, and Palamon from the dungeon-grating

beholds her as she gathers the flowers of spring. He ceases to reply to

Arcite, and stands absorbed in silent ecstasy.

_Arcite._ Cousin! How do you, sir? Why, Palamon!

_Palamon._ Never till now I was in prison, Ar|cite.

_Arcite._ Why, what's the matter, man?

_Palamon._ Behold and won|der:

By heaven, she is a goddess;

_Arcite._ Ha!

_Palamon._ Do rev|erence;

She is a goddess, Arcite!

The beauty of the maiden impresses Arcite no less violently than it

previously had his kinsman; and he challenges with great heat a right to

love her. [Sidenote: The sharp and spirited quarrel between the Kinsmen,

not Shakspere's.] An animated and acrimonious dialogue ensues, in which

Palamon reproachfully pleads his prior admiration of the lady, and

insists on his cousin's obligation to become his abettor instead of his

rival. It is spirited even to excess; and probably Shakspeare would have

tempered, or abstained from treating so sudden and perhaps unnatural an

access of anger and jealousy, and so utter an abandonment to [38:1]its

vehemence, as that under which the fiery Palamon is here represented as

labouring.

[Sidenote: Act II. scene i. Fletcher's.]

_Palamon._ If thou lovest her,

Or entertain'st a hope to blast my wish|es,

Thou art a traitor, Arcite, and a fel|low

False as thy title to her. Friendship, blood,

And all the ties between us, I disclaim,

If thou once think upon her!

_Arcite._ Yes, I love | her!

And, if the lives of all my name lay on | it,

I must do so. I love her with my soul;

If that will lose thee, Palamon, farewell!

I say again I love, and, loving her

I am as worthy and as free a lov|er,

And have as just a title to her beau|ty,

As any Palamon, or any liv|ing

That is a man's son!

_Palamon._ Have I call'd thee friend!

. . . . .

_Palamon._ Put but thy head out of this window more,

And, as I have a soul, I'll nail thy life to't!

_Arcite._ Thou dar'st not, fool: thou canst not: thou art fee|ble:

Put my head out? I'll throw my body out,

And leap the garden, when I see her next,

And pitch between her arms to anger thee.

[Sidenote: Fletcher has left out Chaucer's making the Knights 'sworn

brethren.']

In transferring his story from Chaucer, the poet has here been guilty of

an oversight. The old poet fixes a character of positive guilt on

Arcite's prosecution of his passion, by relating a previous agreement

between the two cousins, by which either, engaging in any adventure

whether of love or war, had an express right to the co-operation of the

other. Hence Arcite's interference with his cousin's claim becomes, with

Chaucer, a direct infringement of a knightly compact; while in the

drama, no deeper blame attaches to it, than as a violation of the more

fragile rules imposed by the generous spirit of friendship.

In the midst of the angry conference, Arcite is called to the Duke to

receive his freedom; and Palamon is placed in stricter confinement, and

removed from the quarter of the tower overlooking the garden.

[Sidenote: Act II. scene ii. (Weber, sc. iii. Littledale) is

Fletcher's.]

In the second scene of this act, Arcite, wandering in the

[39:1]neighbourhood of Athens, soliloquizes on the decree which had

banished him from the Athenian territory; and, falling in with a band of

country people on their way to games in the city, conceives the notion

of joining in the celebration under some poor disguise, in the hope of

finding means to remain within sight of his fancifully beloved mistress.

[Sidenote: Act II. scene ii. iii. (Weber, sc. iii. iv. Littledale),]

Neither this scene, nor the following, in which the jailor's daughter

meditates on the perfections of Palamon, and intimates an intention of

assisting him to escape, have any thing in them worthy of particular

notice.

[Sidenote: Act II. scene iv. (Weber, sc. v. Littledale),]

In the fourth scene, Arcite, victorious in the athletic games, is

crowned by the Duke, and preferred to the service of Emilia.

[Sidenote: Act II. scene v. (Weber, sc. vi. Littledale), are all

Fletcher's.]

In the last scene of the second act, the jailor's daughter announces

that she has effected Palamon's deliverance from prison, and that he

lies hidden in a wood near the city, the scenery of which is prettily

described.

* * * * *

[Sidenote: Act III. scene i. is Shakspere's.]

Nothing in the Third Act can with confidence be attributed to

Shakspeare, except the first scene. This opening scene is laid in the

wood where Palamon has his hiding-place. Arcite enters; and a monologue,

describing his situation and feelings, is, as in Chaucer, overheard by

Palamon, who starts out of the bush in which he had crouched, and shakes

his fettered hands at his false kinsman. [Sidenote: Arcite's first

speech has Shakspere's clear images, and familiar dress, nervous

expression, &c.] A dialogue of mutual reproach ensues; and Arcite

departs with a promise to return, bringing food for the outcast, and

armour to fit him for maintaining, like a knight, his right to the

lady's love. The commencing speech of Arcite has much of Shakspeare's

clearness of imagery, and of the familiarity of dress which he often

loves to bestow upon allusion; it has also great nerve of expression and

calmness of tone, with at least one play on words which is quite in his

manner, and one (perhaps more) of his identical phrases. The text seems

faulty in one part.

[Sidenote: Act III. sc. i. is Shakspere's.]

[Sidenote: Shaksperean phrases.]

[Sidenote: Shakspere phrase.]

_Arcite._ The Duke has lost Hippolita: each took

A several laund. This is a solemn rite

They owe bloom'd May, and the Athenians pay|it

_To the heart of ceremony_. Oh, queen Emil|ia!

Fresher than May, sweeter

Than her _gold buttons_ on the boughs, or all

[40:1]The enamell'd knacks o' the mead or garden! Yea,

We challenge too the bank of any nymph,

That makes the stream seem flowers!--Thou,--oh jew|el

_O' the wood, o' the world_,--hast likewise blest a place

With thy sole presence. In thy rumina|tion

That I, poor man, might eftsoons come between,

And chop on some cold thought!--Thrice blessed chance,

To drop on such a mistress! Expecta|tion

Most guiltless of | it.| Tell me, oh lady For|tune,

(Next after Emily my sovran,) how far

I may be proud. She takes strong note of me,

Hath made me near her, and this beauteous morn,

(The primest of all the year,) presents me with

A brace of horses; two such steeds might well

Be by a pair of kings back'd, in a field

That their crowns' titles tried. Alas, alas!

Poor cousin Palamon, poor prisoner!...

... If

Thou knew'st my mistress breathed on me, and that

I _cared_ her language, lived in her eye, oh coz,

What passion would enclose thee!

There is great spirit, also, in what follows. Some phrases, here again,

are precisely Shakspeare's; and several parts of the dialogue have much

of his pointed epigrammatic style. The massive accumulation of

reproaches which Palamon hurls on Arcite is, in its energy, more like

him than his assistant; and the opposition of character between Palamon

and his calmer kinsman, is well kept up; but the dialogue cannot be

accounted one of the best in the play.

[Sidenote: Shaksperean string of epithets.]

_Palamon._ ... Oh, thou most perfid|ious

That ever gently look'd! The void'st of hon|our

That e'er bore gentle token! Falsest cous|in

That ever blood made kin! call'st thou her thine?

I'll prove it in my shackles, in these hands

Void of appointment, that thou liest, and art

A very thief in love, a chaffy lord,

Not worth the name of villain!--Had I a sword,

And these house-clogs away!

[Sidenote: Shaksperean word-play.]

_Arcite._ _Dear cousin Pal|amon!_

_Palamon._ _Cozener Arcite!_ give me language such

As thou hast shewed me feat.

_Arcite._ Not finding in

[41:1]The circuit of my breast, any gross stuff

To form me like your _blazon_, holds me to

This gentleness of answer. 'Tis your pas|sion

That thus mistakes; the which, to you being en|emy,

Cannot to me be kind....

[Sidenote: Act III. scene ii.]

In the second scene, the only speaker is the jailor's daughter, who,

having lost Palamon in the wood, begins to shew symptoms of unsettled

reason. There is some pathos in several parts of her soliloquy, but

little vigour in the expression, or novelty in the thoughts.

[Sidenote: Act III. scene iii.]

The third scene is an exchange of brief speeches between the two

knights. Arcite brings provisions for his kinsman, and the means of

removing his fetters, and departs to fetch the armour. [Sidenote: is

probably Fletcher's, and not Shakspere's.] In most respects the scene is

not very characteristic of either writer, but leans towards Fletcher;

and one argument for him might be drawn from an interchange of sarcasms

between the kinsmen, in which they retort on each other, former amorous

adventures: such a dialogue is quite like Fletcher's men of gaiety; and

needless degradation of his principal characters, is a fault of which

Shakspeare is not guilty. You may be able, hereafter, to see more

distinctly the force of this reason. The scene contains one strikingly

animated burst of jealous suspicion and impatience.

_Arcite._ Pray you sit down then; and let me entreat | you,

By all the honesty and honour in | you,

No mention of this woman; 'twill disturb | us;

We shall have time enough.

_Palamon._ Well, sir, I'll pledge | you.

. . . . .

_Arcite._ Heigh-ho!

_Palamon._ For Emily, upon my life!--Fool,

Away with this strained mirth!--I say again,

That sigh was breathed for Emily. Base cous|in,

Darest thou break first?

_Arcite._ You are wide.

_Palamon._ By heaven and earth,

There's nothing in thee honest!...

[Sidenote: Act III. scenes iv. v.]

In the next two scenes, placed in the forest, the jailor's daughter has

reached the height of frenzy. [Sidenote: Gerrold has no spark of

humour.] She meets the country[42:1]men who had encountered Arcite, and

who are now headed by the learned and high-fantastical schoolmaster

Gerrold, a personage who has the pedantry of Shakspeare's Holofernes,

without one solitary spark of his humour. They are preparing a dance for

the presence of the duke, and the maniac is adopted into their number,

to fill up a vacancy. The duke and his train appear,--the pedagogue

prologuizes,--the clowns dance,--and their self-satisfied Coryphaeus

apologizes and epiloguizes. [Sidenote: Act III. scene iv. v.

Fletcher's.] Some of Fletcher's very phrases and forms of expression

have been traced in these two scenes.

[Sidenote: Act III. scene vi.]

We have then, in the sixth and last scene of this act, the interrupted

combat of the two princes. [Sidenote: Fletcher's, not Shakspere's.] The

scene is a spirited and excellent one; but its tone is Fletcher's, not

Shakspeare's. [Sidenote: Has not Shakspere's grasp of imagery.] The

raillery and retort of the dialogue is more lightly playful than his,

and less antithetical and sententious; and though there are fine images,

they are not seized with the grasp which Shakspeare would have given,

sometimes harsh, but always at least decided. Some of the illustrations

have been quoted (page 17). The knightly courtesy with which the princes

arm each other is well supported; and their dignity of greeting before

they cross their swords, is fine, exceedingly fine. Nothing can be more

beautifully conceived than the change which comes over the temper of the

generous Palamon, when he stands on the verge of mortal battle with his

enemy. [Sidenote: Fletcher's sweet versification and romantic

phraseology.] His usual heat and impatience give place to the most

becoming calmness. The versification is very sweet, and the romantic air

of the phraseology is very much Fletcher's, especially towards the end

of the following quotation.

_Palamon._ My cause and honour guard | me.

(_They bow several ways, then advance and stand._)

_Arcite._ And me my love; Is there aught else to say?

_Palamon._ This only, and no more: Thou art mine aunt's | son,

And that blood we desire to shed is mu|tual;

In me, thine; and in thee, mine. My sword

Is in my hand, and, if thou killest me,

The gods and I forgive thee! If there be

A place prepared for those that sleep in hon|our,

I wish his weary soul that falls may win | it!

Fight bravely, cous|in;| give me thy noble hand!

_Arcite._ Here, Palamon; this hand shall never more

[43:1]Come near thee with such friendship.

_Palamon._ I commend | thee.

_Arcite._ If I fall, curse me, and say I was a cow|ard;

For none but such dare die in these just tri|als.

Once more farewell, my cousin.

_Palamon._ Farewell, Ar|cite.

(_They fight._)

[Sidenote: Act III. scene vi.]

The combat is interrupted by the approach of the Duke and his court;

and Palamon, refusing to give back or conceal himself, appears before

Theseus, and declares his own name and situation, and the presumptuous

secret of Arcite. [Sidenote: is in Fletcher's style.] The scene is good,

but in the flowing style of Fletcher, not the more manly one of

Shakspeare. [Sidenote: Death-penalty for the losing knight, a good

addition to Chaucer.] The sentence of death, which the duke, in the

first moments of his anger, pronounces on the two princes, is recalled

on the petition of Hippolita and her sister, on condition that the

rivals shall meantime depart, and return within a month, each

accompanied by three knights, to determine in combat the possession of

Emilia; and death by the block is denounced against the knights who

shall be vanquished. Some of these circumstances are slight deviations

from Chaucer; and the laying down of the severe penalty is well

imagined, as an addition to the tragic interest, giving occasion to a

very impressive scene in the last act.

* * * * *

[Sidenote: Act IV. all Fletcher's.]

The Fourth Act may safely be pronounced wholly Fletcher's. [Sidenote:

Wants all the leading features of Shakspere's style.] All of it, except

one scene, is taken up by the episodical adventures of the jailor's

daughter; and, while much of it is poetical, it wants the force and

originality, and, indeed, all the prominent features of Shakspeare's

manner, either of thought, illustration, or expression. There are

conversations in which are described, pleasingly enough, the madness of

the unfortunate girl, and the finding of her in a sylvan spot, by her

former wooer; but when the maniac herself appears, the tone and subjects

of the dialogue become more objectionable.

[Sidenote: Act IV. scene ii.]

In the second scene of this act, the only one which bears reference to

the main business of the piece, Emilia first muses over the pictures of

her two suitors, and then hears from a messenger, in presence of Theseus

and his attendants, a description, (taken in [44:1]its elements from the

Knightes Tale,) of the warriors who were preparing for the field along

with the champion lovers. [Sidenote: Emilia's soliloquy on the pictures,

not Shakspere's.] In the soliloquy of the lady, while the poetical

spirit is well preserved, the alternations of feeling are given with an

abruptness and a want of insight into the nicer shades of association,

which resemble the extravagant stage effects of the 'King and No King,'

infinitely more than the delicate yet piercing glance with which

Shakspeare looks into the human breast in the 'Othello'; the language,

too, is smoother and less powerful than Shakspeare's, and one or two

classical allusions are a little too correct and studied for him.

[Sidenote: Act IV. scene ii. Fletcher's.] One image occurs, not the

clearest or most chastened, in which Fletcher closely repeats himself:--

[Sidenote: His description of Arcite, paralleld in his _Philaster_.]

What a brow,

Of what a spacious majesty, he car|ries!

Arched like the great-eyed Juno's, but far sweet|er,--

Smoother than Pelop's shoulder. Fame and Hon|our,

Methinks, from hence, as from a promontor|y

Pointed in Heaven, should clap their wings, and sing

To all the under-world, the loves and fights

Of gods and such men near them.[45:1]

[Sidenote: Act V. is Shakspere's,]

In the Fifth Act we again feel the presence of the Master of the Spell.

Several passages in this portion are marked by as striking tokens of his

art as anything which we read in 'Macbeth' or 'Coriolanus.' The whole

act, a very long one, may be boldly attributed to him, with the

exception of one episodical scene.

[Sidenote: except scene iv. (Weber: sc. ii. Littledale).]

The time has arrived for the combat. Three temples are exhibited, as in

Chaucer, in which the rival Knights, and the [45:2]Lady of their Vows,

respectively pay their adorations. One principal aim of their

supplications is to learn the result of the coming contest; but the

suspense is kept up by each of the Knights receiving a favourable

response, and Emilia a doubtful one. [Sidenote: Act V. sc. ii.[45:3] (i.

L.) is lower in key.] [Sidenote: Act V. sc. i. iii. (Weber: both i.

Littledale) are Shakspere's all through.] Three scenes are thus

occupied, the second of which is in somewhat a lower key than the other

two; but even in it there is much beauty; and in the first and third the

tense dignity and pointedness of the language, the gorgeousness and

overflow of illustration, and the reach, the mingled familiarity and

elevation of thought, are admirable, inimitable, and decisive. From

these exquisite scenes there is a temptation to quote too largely.

[Sidenote: Act V. scene i.]

In the first scene, Theseus ushers the Kinsmen and their Knights into

the Temple of Mars, and leaves them there. After a short and solemn

greeting, the Kinsmen embrace for the last time, Palamon and his friends

retire, and Arcite and his remain and offer up their devotions to the

deity of the place. [Sidenote: Spirit and Language Shakspere's.] A fine

seriousness of spirit breathes through the whole scene, and the language

is alive with the most magnificent and delicate allusion. In Arcite's

prayer the tone cannot be mistaken. [Sidenote: His reflection on Fortune

and strife.] The enumeration of the god's attributes is coloured by all

that energetic depth of feeling with which Shakspeare in his historical

dramas so often turns aside to meditate on the changes of human fortune

and the horrors of human enmity.[46:1]

. . . . .

_Theseus._ You valiant and strong-hearted enemies,

You royal germane foes, that this day come

To blow the nearness out that flames between | ye,--

Lay by your anger for an hour, and dove|-like,

Before the holy altars of your Help|ers

(The all-feard Gods) bow down your stubborn bod|ies!

Your ire is more than mortal: so your help | be!

. . . . .

[Sidenote: Shakspere phrases.]

_Arcite._ ... Hoist | we

Those sails that must these vessels port even where

The Heavenly Limiter pleases!

. . . . .

[46:2]Knights, kinsmen, lovers, yea, my sacrifi|ces!

True worshippers of Mars, whose spirit in you

Expels the seeds of fear, and the apprehen|sion

Which still is father of it,--go with me

Before the god of our profession. There

Require of him the hearts of lions, and

_The breath of tigers, yea the fierceness too,

Yea the speed also!_ to go on I mean,

Else wish we to be snails. You know my prize

Must be draggd out of blood: Force and great Feat

Must put my garland on, where she will stick

The queen of flowers; our intercession then

Must be to him that makes the camp _a ces|tron

Brimmd with the blood of men_: give me your aid,

And bend your spirits towards him!

(_They fall prostrate before the statue._)

[Sidenote: Shakspere's own work,]

Thou mighty one! that with thy power has turn'd

Green Neptune into purple,--whose approach

Comets prewarn,--_whose havock in vast field

Unearthèd skulls proclaim_,--whose breath blows down

The teeming Ceres' foyson,--who dost pluck

_With hand armipotent from forth blue clouds_

The masoned turrets,--that both mak'st and break'st

The stony girths of cities;--me, thy pup|il,

Young'st follower of thy drum, instruct this day

With military skill, that to thy laud

I may advance my streamer, and by thee

Be styled the lord o' the day: Give me, great Mars,

Some token of thy pleasure!

(_Here there is heard clanging of armour, with a short thunder, as the

burst of a battle; whereupon they all rise and bow to the altar._)

[Sidenote: Shakspere again.]

Oh, great Corrector of enormous times!

_Shaker of o'er rank states!_ Thou grand Decid|er

Of dusty and old ti|tles;|--_that heal'st with blood

The earth when it is sick_, and cur'st the world

O' the pleurisy of people! I do take

Thy signs auspiciously, and in thy name

To my design march boldly. Let us go! (_Exeunt._)

[Sidenote: Palamon's prayer in V. ii (i. L.) not equal to V. i. or iii.

(i. L.), but is yet clearly Shakspere's.]

The passionate and sensitive Palamon has chosen the Queen of Love as his

Patroness, and it is in her Temple that, in the [47:1]second scene, he

puts up his prayers. This scene is not equal to the first or third,

having the poetical features less prominently brought out, while the

tone of thought is less highly pitched, and also less consistently

sustained. But it is distinctly Shakspeare's. The rugged versification

is his, and the force of language. [Sidenote: Even the incompetent old

husband bit is his.] One unpleasing sketch of the deformity of decrepit

old age, which need not be quoted, is largely impressed with his air of

truth, and some personifications already noticed are also in his manner.

[Sidenote: Act V. scene ii. (Weber; i. Littledale) is Shakspere's.]

[Sidenote: A Shakspere touch.]

_Palamon._ Our stars must glister with new fire, or be

To-day extinct: our argument is love!

. . . . . (_They kneel._)

Hail, sovereign Queen of Secrets! who hast pow|er

To call the fiercest tyrant from his rage

To weep unto a girl!--that hast the might

Even with an eye-glance to choke Mars's drum,

And turn the alarm to whis|pers!|...

What gold-like pow|er

Hast thou not power upon? To Phoebus thou

Add'st flames hotter than his: the heavenly fires

Did scorch his mortal son, thou him: The Hunt|ress

All moist and cold, some say, began to throw

Her bow away and sigh. Take to thy grace

Me thy vowd soldier,--who do bear thy yoke

As 'twere a wreath of roses, yet is heav|ier

Than lead itself, stings more than net|tles:--

I have never been foul-mouthed against thy law;

... I have been harsh

To large confessors, and have hotly askt | them

If they had mothers: _I_ had one,--a wom|an,

And women 'twere they wronged....

Brief,--I am

To those that prate and have done,--no compan|ion;

To those that boast and have not,--a defi|er;

To those that would and cannot,--a rejoi|cer!

Yea, him I do not love, that tells close offices

The foulest way, nor names concealments in

The boldest language: Such a one I am,

And vow that _lover never yet made sigh

Truer than I_....

(_Music is heard, and doves are seen to flutter: they fall upon their

faces._)

[48:1]I give thee thanks

For this fair token!...

[Sidenote: Emilia's Prayer is surely Shakspere's.]

Emilia's Prayer in the Sanctuary of the pure Diana, forming the third

scene, is in some parts most nervous, and the opening is inexpressibly

beautiful in language and rhythm. Several ideas and idioms are

identically Shakspeare's.

[Sidenote: Act V. scene iii. (Weber; i. Littledale) Shakspere's]

_Emilia._ (_Kneeling before the altar._) Oh, sacred, shadowy, cold,

and constant Queen!

_Abandoner of revels!_ mute, contemplative,

Sweet, solitary, white as chaste, and pure

As wind-fanned snow!--who to thy _female knights_

Allow'st no more blood than will make a blush,

Which is there order's robe!--I here, thy priest,

Am humbled 'fore thine altar. Oh, vouchsafe,

With that thy rare _green eye_,[49:1] which never yet

Beheld thing maculate, look on thy virg|in!

And,--sacred silver Mistress!--lend thine ear,

(Which ne'er heard scurril term, into whose port

Ne'er entered wanton sound,) to my petit|ion

Seasoned with holy fear!--This is my last

Of vestal office: [49:2]I'm bride-habited,

But maiden-heart|ed.| A husband I have, appoint|ed,

But do not know him; out of two I should

Chuse one, and pray for his success, but I

Am guiltless of election of mine eyes.[49:2]

. . . . .

(_A rose-tree ascends from under the altar, having one rose upon it._)

See what our general of ebbs and flows

Out from the bowels of her holy al|tar

With sacred act advances! But one rose?

If well inspired, this battle shall confound

Both these brave knights, and I a virgin flow|er

Must grow alone unplucked.

(_Here is heard a sudden twang of instruments, and the rose falls from

the tree._)

[49:3]The flower is fallen, the tree descends!--oh, mis|tress,

Thou here dischargest me: I shall be gath|ered,

I think so; but I know not thine own will;

Unclasp thy mystery!--I hope she's pleased;

Her signs were gracious. (_Exeunt._)

[Sidenote: Act V. scene iv. (Weber; ii. Littledale) is stuff.]

The fourth scene, in which the characters are the jailor's daughter, her

father and lover, and a physician, is disgusting and imbecile in the

extreme. It may be dismissed with a single quotation:

_Doctor._ What stuff she utters!

[Sidenote: Act V. scene v. (Weber; iii. Littledale). Its strangeness.]

The fifth scene is the Combat, the arrangement of which is unusual.

Perhaps there is nothing in every respect resembling it in the circle of

the English drama. Theseus and his court cross the stage as proceeding

to the lists; Emilia pauses and refuses to be present; the rest depart,

and she is left. She then, the prize of the struggle, the presiding

influence of the day, alone occupies the stage: within, the trumpets are

heard sounding the charge, and the cries of the spectators and tumult of

the encounter reach her ears; one or two messengers recount to her the

various changes of the field, till Arcite's victory ends the fight. The

manner is admirable in which the caution, which rendered it advisable to

avoid introducing the combat on the stage, is reconciled with the pomp

of scenic effect and bustle. [Sidenote: Shakspere's hand is in it.] The

details of the scene, with which alone we have here to do, make it clear

that Shakspeare's hand was in it. The greater part, it is true, is not

of the highest excellence; but the vacillations of Emilia's feelings are

well and delicately given, some individual thoughts and words mark

Shakspeare, there is a little of his obscure brevity, much of his

thoughtfulness legitimately applied, and an instance or two of its

abuse. The strong likeness to him will justify some quotations.

In the following lines Theseus is pleading with Emilia for her presence

in the lists:--

[Sidenote: Shakspere.]

_Theseus._ You must be there:

This trial is as 'twere in the night, and you

The only star to shine.

[Sidenote: Shakspere.]

[50:1]_Emilia._ I am extinct.

There is but envy in that light, which shews

The one the other. Darkness, which ever was

The dam of Horror, who does stand accursed

Of many mortal millions, may even now,

By casting her black mantle over both

That neither could find other, get herself

Some part of a good name, and many a mur|der

Set off whereto she's guilty.[50:2]

. . . . .

One good description is put into the mouth of Emilia after she is left

alone:--

[Sidenote: Act V. scene v. (Weber; or sc. iii. Littledale). Shakspere's

hand in it.]

[Sidenote: Shakspere.]

_Emilia._ Arcite is gently visaged; yet his eye

Is like an engine bent, or a sharp weap|on

In a soft sheath: Mercy and manly Cour|age

Are bedfellows in his visage. Palamon

Has a most menacing aspect: his brow

Is graved, and seems to bury what it frowns | on;

Yet sometimes 'tis not so, but alters to

The quality of his thoughts: long time his eye

Will dwell upon his object: melanchol|y

Becomes him nobly; so does Arcite's mirth:

But Palamon's sadness is a kind of mirth,

So mingled, as if mirth did make him sad,

And sadness mer|ry:| those darker humours that

Stick unbecomingly on oth|ers,| on him

Live in fair dwelling.

After several alternations of fortune in the fight, she again speaks

thus of the two:

... [51:1]Were they metamor|phosed

Both into one--oh why? there were no wom|an

Worth so composed a man! their single share,

Their nobleness peculiar to them, gives

The prejudice of dispar|ity,| value's shortness,

To any lady breathing....

(_Cornets: a great shout, and cry_, Arcite, victory!)

[51:2]_Servant._ The cry is

Arcite and victory! Hark, Arcite, vic|tory!

The combat's consummation is proclaimed

By the wind instruments.

[Sidenote: Shakspere touch.]

[Sidenote: Shakspere reflection.]

_Emilia._ Half-sights saw

That Arcite was no babe: god's-lid! _his rich|ness_

_And costliness of spirit looked through |him_: | it could

No more be hid in him than fire in flax,

Than humble banks can go to law with wa|ters

That drift winds force to raging. I did think

Good Palamon would miscarry; yet I knew | not

Why I did think | so.| _Our Reasons are net proph|ets

When oft our Fancies are._ They're coming off:

Alas, poor Palamon!

Theseus enters with his attendants, conducting Arcite, as conqueror, and

presents him to Emilia as her husband. Arcite's situation is a painful

one, and is well discriminated: he utters but a single grave sentence.

_Theseus._ (_To Arcite and Emilia._) Give me your hands:

Receive you her, you him: be plighted with

A love that grows as you decay!

_Arcite._ Emily!

To buy you I have lost what's dearest to | me,

Save what is bought; and yet I purchase cheap|ly,

As I do rate your value.

. . . . .

[Sidenote: Shakspere touch.]

_Theseus._ (_To Arcite._) Wear the gar|land

With joy that you have won. For the subdued,--

Give them our present justice, _since I know

Their lives but pinch them_. Let it here be done.

The sight's not for our seeing: go we hence

Right joyful, with some sorrow!--Arm your prize:

I know you will not lose | her.| Hippolita,

I see one eye of yours conceives a tear,

The which it will deliv|er.|

_Emilia._ Is this, winning?

Oh, all you heavenly powers! where is your mer|cy?

But that your wills have said it must be so,

And charge me live to comfort this unfriend|ed,

This miserable prince, that cuts away

A life more worthy from him than all wom|en,

I should and would die too.

[52:1]_Hippolita._ Infinite pity,

That four such eyes should be so fixed on one,

That two must needs be blind for't. (_Exeunt._)

[Sidenote: Act V. scene vi. (Weber; sc. iv. Littledale) is clearly

Shakspere's.]

The authorship of the last scene admits of no doubt. The manner is

Shakspeare's, and some parts are little inferior to his very finest

passages. Palamon has been vanquished, and he and his friends are to

undergo execution of the sentence to which the laws of the combat

subjected them. The depth of the interest is now fixed on these

unfortunate knights, and a fine spirit of resigned melancholy inspires

the scene in which they pass to their deaths.[52:2]

(_Enter Palamon and his knights, pinioned; jailor, executioner, and

guard._)

_Palamon._ There's many a man alive that hath outlived

The love of the people; yea, in the self-same state

[53:1]Stands many a father with his child; some com|fort

We have by so considering. We expire,--

And not without men's pity;--to live still,

Have their good wishes. We prevent

[53:2]The loathsome misery of age, beguile

The gout and rheum, that in lag hours attend

For grey approachers. We come towards the gods

Young and unwarped, not halting under crimes

Many and stale; that sure shall please the gods

[53:3]Sooner than such, to give us nectar with | them,--

For we are more clear spir|its!|...

_2 Knight._ Let us bid farewell;

And with our patience anger tottering for|tune,

Who at her certain'st reels.

_3 Knight._ Come, who begins?

_Palamon._ Even he that led you to this banquet shall

Taste to you all....

. . . . .

Adieu, and let my life be now as short

As my leave-taking. (_Lies on the block._)

If we were in a situation to give due effect to the supernatural part of

the story, the miserable end of Palamon would affect us with a mingled

sense of pity and indignation. He has been promised success by the

divinity whom he adored, and yet he lies vanquished with the uplifted

axe glittering above his head. Both the drama and Chaucer's poem assume

the existence of such feelings on our part, and hasten to remove the

cause of them. [Sidenote: Chaucer's celestial agency to work out the

plot.] A way is devised for reconciling the contending oracles; and the

catastrophe which effects that end, is, in the old poet, anxiously

prepared by celestial agency.[53:4] Arcite has got the victory in the

field, as his warlike divinity had promised him; and an evil spirit is

raised for the purpose of bringing about his death, that the votary of

the Queen of Love may be allowed to enjoy the gentler meed which his

protectress had pledged herself to bestow. These supernal intrigues are,

in the play, no more than hinted at in the way of metaphor.

A cry is heard for delay of the execution; Perithous rushes in, ascends

the scaffold, and, raising Palamon from the block, announces the

approaching death of Arcite, with nearly the same circumstances as in

the poem. While he rode townwards from the lists, on a black steed which

had been the gift of Emily, he had been thrown with violence, and now

lies on the brink of dissolution. [Sidenote: Description of Arcite's

mishap is bad, but Shakspere's.] The speech which describes Arcite's

misadven[54:1]ture has been much noticed by the critics, and by some

lavishly praised. With deference, I think it decidedly bad, but

undeniably the work of Shakspeare. [Sidenote: Over-labourd, involvd,

hard, yet Shakspere's, with his words and thoughts.] The whole manner of

it is that of some of his long and over-laboured descriptions. It is

full of illustration, infelicitous but not weak; in involvement of

sentence and hardness of phrase no passage in the play comes so close to

him; and there are traceable in one or two instances, not only his

words, but the trains of thought in which he indulges elsewhere,

especially the description of the horse, which closely resembles some

spirited passages in the Venus and Adonis. It is needless to quote any

part of this speech.

[Sidenote: End of the _Two Noble Kinsmen_.]

The after-part of this scene, which ends the play, contains some

forcible and lofty reflection, and the language is exceedingly vigorous

and weighty. In Chaucer, the feelings of the dying Arcite are expressed

at much length, and very touchingly; in the play, they are dispatched

shortly, and the attention continued on Palamon, who had been its

previous object:--

(_Enter Theseus, Hippolita, Emilia, Arcite in a chair._)

_Palamon._ Oh, miserable end of our alli|ance!

The gods are mighty!--Arcite, if thy heart,

Thy worthy, manly heart, be yet unbro|ken,

Give me thy last words. I am Palamon,

One that yet loves thee dying.

_Arcite._ Take Emil|ia,

And with her all the world's joy. Reach thy hand:

Farewell! I've told my last hour. I was false,

But never treacherous: Forgive me, cous|in!

One kiss from fair Emilia!--'Tis done:

Take her.--I die!

_Palamon._ Thy brave soul seek Elys|ium!

. . . . .

[Sidenote: Shakspere.]

_Theseus._ _His part is played; and, though it were too short,

He did it well._ Your day is lengthened, and

The blissful dew of heaven does arrose | you:

The powerful Venus well hath graced her al|tar,

And given you your love; our master Mars

Hath vouched his oracle, and to Arcite gave

The grace of the contention: So the de|ities

Have shewed due justice.--Bear this hence.

_Palamon._ Oh, cous|in!

That we should things desire, which do cost | us

[55:1]The loss of our desire! that nought could buy

Dear love, but loss of dear love!

[Sidenote: Shakspere.]

_Theseus._ ... Palamon!

Your kinsman hath confessed, the right o' the la|dy

Did lie in you: for you first saw her, and

Even then proclaimed your fancy. He restord | her

As your stolen jewel, and desired your spir|it

To send him hence forgiven! The gods my jus|tice

Take from my hand, and they themselves become

The executioners. Lead your lady off:

And call your lovers from the stage of death,

Whom I adopt my friends.--A day or two

Let us look sadly, and give grace unto

The funeral of Arcite; in whose end,

The visages of bridegrooms we'll put on,

And smile with Palamon; for whom, an hour,

But one hour since, I was as dearly sor|ry,

As glad of Arcite; and am now as glad,

As for him sorry.--Oh, you _heavenly charm|ers_!

What things you make of us! For what we lack,

We laugh; for what we have, are sorry still;

Are children in some kind.--Let us be thank|ful

For that which is, and with you leave disputes

That are above our question.--Let us go off,

And bear us like the time! (_Exeunt omnes._)

You have now before you an outline of the subject of this highly

poetical drama, with specimens which may convey some notion of the

manner in which the plan is executed. But detached extracts cannot

furnish materials for a just decision as to the part which Shakspeare

may have taken even in writing the scenes from which the quotations are

given. If I addressed myself to one previously unacquainted with this

drama, I should be compelled to request an attentive study of it from

beginning to end. [Sidenote: Two authors wrote _The Two Noble Kinsmen_.]

Such a perusal would convince the most sceptical mind that two authors

were concerned in the work; it would be perceived that certain scenes

are distinguished by certain prominent characters, while others present

different and dissimilar features. [Sidenote: Fletcher was one.] If we

are to assume that Fletcher wrote parts of the play, we must admit that

many parts of it were written by another person, and we have only to

inquire who that other was. [Sidenote: The other was Shakspere.] Without

recurring to any external presump[56:1]tions whatever, I think there is

enough in most or all of the parts which are evidently not Fletcher's,

to appropriate them to the great poet whose name, in this instance,

tradition has associated with his. Even in the passages which have been

here selected, you cannot but have traced Shakspeare's hand frequently

and unequivocally. The introductory views which I slightly suggested to

your recollection, may have furnished some rules of judgment, and

cleared away some obstacles from the path; and where I have failed in

bringing out distinctly the real points of difference, your own acute

judgment and delicate taste must have enabled you to draw instinctively

those inferences which I have attempted to reach by systematic

deduction.

[Sidenote: Fletcher easily distinguisht from Shakspere.]

In truth, a question of this sort is infinitely more easy of decision

where Fletcher is the author against whose claims Shakspeare's are to be

balanced, than it could be if the poet's supposed assistant were any

other ancient English dramatist. If a drama were presented to us, where,

as in some of Shakspeare's received works, he had taken up the ruder

sketch of an older poet, and exerted his skill in altering and enlarging

it, it would be very difficult indeed to discriminate between the

original and his additions. [Sidenote: Shakspere's Histories: their

fault.] He has often, especially in his earlier works, and in his

histories more particularly, much of that exaggeration of ideas, and

that strained and labouring force of expression, which marked the

Hercules-like infancy of the English Drama. [Sidenote: Marlowe.]

[Sidenote: Marlowe's magnificence like Shakspere sometimes.] The

stateliness with which Marlowe paces the tragic stage, and the

magnificence of the train of solemn shews which attend him like the

captives in a Roman procession of triumph, bear no distant likeness to

the shape which Shakspeare's genius assumes in its most lofty moods. And

with those also who followed the latter, or trode side by side with him,

he has many points of resemblance or identity. [Sidenote: Jonson.]

[Sidenote: Massinger.] [Sidenote: Middleton.] Jonson has his seriousness

of views, his singleness of purpose, his weight of style, and his

"fulness and frequency of sentence;" Massinger has his comprehension of

thought, giving birth to an involved and parenthetical mode of

construction; and Middleton, if he possesses few of his other qualities,

has much of his precision and straightforward earnestness of

expression.[57:1] In examining isolated passages with the view of

ascertaining whether they were written by Shakspeare or by any of those

other [57:2]poets, we should frequently have no ground of decision but

the insecure and narrow one of comparative excellence. [Sidenote:

Fletcher and Shakspere contrasted.] [Sidenote: They differ in _kind_.]

When Fletcher is Shakspeare's only competitor, we are very seldom driven

to adopt so doubtful a footing; we are not compelled to reason from

difference in _degree_, because we are sensible of a striking

dissimilarity in _kind_. [Sidenote: Fletcher.] [Sidenote: Shakspere.]

[Sidenote: Fletcher.] [Sidenote: Shakspere.] [Sidenote: Fletcher.]

[Sidenote: Shakspere.] [Sidenote: Fletcher.] [Sidenote: Shakspere.] We

observe ease and elegance of expression opposed to energy and

quaintness; brevity is met by dilation, and the obscurity which results

from hurry of conception has to be compared with the vagueness

proceeding from indistinctness of ideas; lowness, narrowness, and

poverty of thought, are contrasted with elevation, richness, and

comprehension: on the one hand is an intellect barely active enough to

seek the true elements of the poetical, and on the other a mind which,

seeing those finer relations at a glance, darts off in the wantonness of

its luxuriant strength to discover qualities with which poetry is but

ill fitted to deal; in the one poet we behold that comparative

feebleness of fancy which willingly stoops to the correction of taste,

and in the other, that warmth, splendour, and quickness of imagination,

which flows on like the burning rivers from a volcano, quenching all

paler lights in its spreading radiance, and destroying every barrier

which would impede or direct its devouring course. You will remark that

certain passages or scenes in this play are attributed to Shakspeare,

not because they are superior to Fletcher's tone or manner, but because

they are unlike it. [Sidenote: Shakspere's work unlike Fletcher's.] It

may be true that most of these possess higher excellence than Fletcher

could have easily reached; but this is merely an extrinsic circumstance,

and it is not upon it that the judgment is founded. [Sidenote: Test

between Shakspere and Fletcher.] These passages are recognized as

Shakspeare's, not from possessing in a higher degree those qualities in

which Fletcher's merit lies, but from exhibiting other qualities in

which he is partially or wholly wanting, and which even singly, and

still more when combined, constitute a style and manner opposite to his.

Indeed, since Fletcher is acknowledged to stand immeasurably lower than

Shakspeare, the excellence of some passages might perhaps in itself be

no unfair reason for refusing to the inferior poet the credit of their

execution. But an analysis of the means by which the excellence is

produced places us beyond [58:1]the necessity of resorting, in the first

instance at least, to this general ground of decision, which must,

however, be taken into view, when we have been able to assume a position

which entitles us to take advantage of it. [Sidenote: Shakspere's

external qualities in the _Two Noble Kinsmen_.] [Sidenote: Are they

imitations?] In many parts of this play we find those external qualities

which form Shakspeare's distinguishing characteristics, not separately

and singly present, but combined most fully and most intimately; and it

is consequently indisputable that we have, either Shakspeare's own

writing, or a faithful and successful imitation of it. [Sidenote:

Imitation of Shakspere difficult.] It is not easy to perceive with

perfect clearness why it is that imitation of Shakspeare is peculiarly

difficult; but every one is convinced that it is far more so than in the

case of any other poet whatever. [Sidenote: Why it is so.] The range and

opposition of his qualities, the rarity and loftiness of the most

remarkable of these, and still more, the coincident operation of his

most dissimilar powers, make it next to impossible, even in short and

isolated passages, to produce an imitation which shall be mistaken for

his original composition: but there is not even a possibility of success

in an attempt to carry on such an imitation of him throughout many

entire scenes. [Sidenote: Given, his outside dress, ask whether his

spirit is inside it.] Where the external qualities of a work resemble

his, the question of his authorship can be determined in no other way

than by inquiring whether the essential elements, and the spirit which

animates the whole, are his also; and that inquiry is not one for

logical argument; it can be answered only by reflection on the effect

which the work produces on our own minds. [Sidenote: The poetic sense

alone can judge.] The dullest eye can discriminate the free motions of

the living frame from the convulsed writhings which art may excite in

the senseless corpse; the nightly traveller easily distinguishes between

the red and earthy twinkling of the distant cottage-lamp, and the cold

white gleam of the star which rises beyond it;--and with equal quickness

and equal certainty the poetical sense can decide whether the living and

ethereal principle of poetry is present, or only its corporeal clothing,

its dead and inert resemblance. [Sidenote: By the emotion it creates,

must Shakspere's work be judgd.] The emotion which poetry necessarily

awakens in minds qualified as the subjects of its working, is the only

evidence of its presence, and the measure and index of its strength. If

we can read with coldness and indifference the drama which we are now

examining, we must pronounce it to [59:1]be no more than a skilful

imitation of Shakspeare; but we must acknowledge it as an original if

the heart burns and the fancy expands under its influence,--if we feel

that the poetical and dramatic spirit breathes through all,--and if the

mind bows down involuntarily before the powers of whose presence it is

secretly but convincingly sensible. [Sidenote: And his part of _The Two

Noble Kinsmen_ witnesses for itself.] I cannot have a doubt that the

parts of this work which I have pointed out as Shakspeare's will the

more firmly endure this trial, the more closely and seriously they are

revolved and studied.

[Sidenote: Shakspere's share of _The Two Noble Kinsmen_.]

The portions of the drama which, on such principles as these, have been

set down as Shakspeare's, compose a large part of its bulk, and embrace

most of the material circumstances of the story. [Sidenote: Act I.]

[Sidenote: Act III. sc. i.] [Sidenote: Act V. except scene iv.] They

are,--the First Act wholly,--one scene out of six in the Third,--and the

whole of the Fifth Act, (a very long one,) except one unimportant scene.

These parts are not of equal excellence, but the grounds on which a

decision as to their authorship rests, seem to be almost equally strong

with regard to each.

We have as yet been considering these scenes as so many separate pieces

of poetry; and they are valuable even in that light, not less from their

intrinsic merit than as being the work of our greatest poet. If it be

true merely that Shakspeare has here executed some portions of a plan

which another had previously fixed on and sketched, the drama demands

our zealous study, and is entitled to a place among Shakspeare's works.

An examination of separate details cannot enable us to form any more

specific opinion as to the part which he may have taken in its

composition.

* * * * *

[Sidenote: Is the design of _The Two Noble Kinsmen_ Shakspere's?]

But there is a further inquiry on which we are bound to enter, whatever

its result may be,--whether it shall allow us to attribute to Shakspeare

a wider influence over the work, or compel us to limit his claim to the

subsidiary authorship, which only we have yet been able to establish for

him. We must now endeavour to trace the design of the work to its

origin; we must look on the parts in their relation to the whole, and

investigate the qualities and character of that whole which the parts

compose. Such an analysis is essential to an appreciation of the real

merit of the drama, and suggests views of far-greater inte[60:1]rest

than any which offer themselves in the examination of isolated passages.

And it is likewise necessary as a part of the inquiry which is our

object, not merely because it may tend to strengthen or modify the

decisions which we have already formed, but because it will allow us to

determine other important questions which we have had no opportunity of

treating. [Sidenote: Yes, it is.] It will justify us, if I mistake not,

in pronouncing with some confidence, that this drama owes to Shakspeare

much more than the composition of a few scenes,--that he was the poet

who chose the story, and arranged the leading particulars of the method

in which it is handled.

* * * * *

[Sidenote: The tragic-comic underplot not Shakspere's.]

Before we enter the extensive and interesting field of inquiry thus

opened to us, it may be well that I explain the reasons which seem

distinctly to exclude from Shakspeare's part of the work one

considerable portion of it,--the whole of the tragi-comic under-plot. I

have as yet assigned no ground of rejection, but inferiority in the

execution; but there are other reasons, which, when combined with that,

remove all uncertainty. Slightly as this subordinate story has been

described, enough has been said to point out remarkable imitations of

Shakspeare, both in incident and character. [Sidenote: Fletcher's

borrowings in the underplot, from Shakspere.] The insane maiden is a

copy of Ophelia, with features from 'Lear'; the comments of the

physician on her sickness of the mind, are borrowed in conception from

'Macbeth'; the character of the fantastic schoolmaster is a repetition

of the pedagogue in 'Love's Labour Lost'; and the exhibition of the

clowns which he directs, resemble scenes both in that play and in the

'Midsummer Night's Dream.' All these circumstances together, or even one

of them by itself, are enough to destroy the notion of Shakspeare's

authorship. The likeness which is found elsewhere to Shakspeare's style,

(and which is far closer in those other parts of the play than it is

here,) is an argument, as I have shewn, in favour of his authorship; the

likeness here in character and incident is even a stronger one against

it. [Sidenote: Shakspere doesn't imitate himself in character as he does

in style.] In neither of these latter particulars does Shakspeare

imitate himself as he does in style. In some of his earlier plays indeed

we may trace the rude outlines of characters, chiefly comic, which he

was afterwards able to develope with [61:1]greater distinctness and more

striking features; but though the likeness, in those cases, were nearer

and more frequent than it is, the transition from the rude block to the

finished sculpture is the allowable and natural progress of genius.

[Sidenote: He doesn't reproduce a figure badly.] The bare reproduction

of a figure or a scene already drawn with clearness and success, stands

in a very different situation; and, even if it should be nearly equal to

the original in actual merit, it creates a strong presumption of its

being no more than the artifice of an imitator. Where the inferiority of

the execution is palpable, the doubt is raised into certainty.

[Sidenote: Shakspere could not have turned his Ophelia into the Jailer's

daughter of _The Two Noble Kinsmen_.] In the case before us, it is

impossible to receive the idea of Shakspeare sitting down in cold blood

to imitate the Ophelia, and to transfer all the tenderness of her

situation to a new drama of a far lower tone, in which also it should

occupy only a subordinate station. He could not have been guilty of

this; he neither needed it, nor would have done it of free will; and,

therefore, I could not have believed it to be his, though the execution

had been far better than it is. [Sidenote: This Daughter is an utter

failure.] But the inferiority is decided; the imitation produces neither

vigour of style nor depth of feeling; in short, Shakspeare, if he had

made the attempt, could not have failed so utterly. [Sidenote: The

Schoolmaster is not Shakspere's.] The comic parts are only subservient

to the serious portion of this story; and if Shakspeare did not write

the leading part, he was still less likely to have written the

accessory; but, besides, the imitation is equally unsuccessful; and the

original of the schoolmaster is said to have been a personal portrait,

which was very unlikely to have been repeated by the first painter after

the freshness of the jest was gone. I have been the more anxious to

place in its true light the question as to this part of the drama,

because, on its seeming likeness to Shakspeare, Steevens founds an

ingenious hypothesis, by which he endeavours to account for the origin

of the tradition as to Shakspeare's concern in the play. That this is a

designed imitation of Shakspeare is abundantly clear; and it is not

difficult to see why it is an unsuccessful one. [Sidenote: Fletcher's

designd imitation of Shakspere.] Fletcher possesses much humour, but it

is of a cast very unlike Shakspeare's, and very unfit to harmonise with

it, or to qualify him for the imitation which he has here attempted. Why

he made the attempt, we shall be able to discover only when the freaks

of caprice, and of poetical caprice, [62:1]the wildest of all, shall be

fully analyzed and fully accounted for. [Sidenote: The underplot not

Shakspere's.] All that I have to prove is, that this portion of the work

is not, and could not have been, Shakspeare's.

* * * * *

[Sidenote: Shakspere's choice of subjects for his Plays.]

I have said that I consider as his, both the selection of the plot, and

much of its arrangement. [Sidenote: He differs from his chief

contemporaries and successors.] As to the Choice of the Subject, my

position is, that in this particular, Shakspeare stands in unequivocal

opposition to Jonson, Beaumont and Fletcher, and those others,

contemporary with him, or a little his juniors, with whom his name is

generally associated. I can easily shew that this opposition to the

newer school in the choice of stories exists in Shakspeare individually;

and this would be enough for my purpose; but I will go a little farther

than I am called on, because I conceive him to share that opposition

with some other poets, and because views open to us from this

circumstance, which are of some value for the right understanding of his

characteristics. [Sidenote: He belongs to the old school.] I say then,

that in the choice of subjects particularly, as well as in other

features, Shakspeare belongs to a school older than that of Fletcher,

and radically different from it. [Sidenote: Shakspere took old stories;

new poets new ones.] The principle of the contrariety in the choice of

subjects between the older and newer schools, is this: the older poets

usually prefer stories with which their audience must have been

previously familiar; the newer poets avoid such known subjects, and

attempt to create an adventitious interest for their pieces, by

appealing to the passion of curiosity, and feeding it with novelty of

incident. [Sidenote: Early Plays founded on] The early writers may have

adopted their rule of choice from a distrust in their own skill: but

they are more likely to have been influenced by reflecting on the

inexperience of their audience in theatrical exhibitions. [Sidenote:

History and Tales of Chivalry.] By insisting on this quality in their

plots, they hampered themselves much in the choice of them; and the

subjects which offered themselves to the older among them, were mainly

confined to two classes, history and the chivalrous tales, being the

only two cycles of story with which, about the time of Shakspeare's

birth, any general familiarity could be presumed. That such were the

favourite themes of the infant English drama is abundantly clear, even

from the lists of old lost dramas which have been preserved to us.

[Sidenote: Classical fables and foreign novels.] By the time when

Shakspeare stepped into [63:1]the arena, the zeal for translation had

increased the stock of popular knowledge by the addition of the

classical fables and the foreign modern novels; and his immediate

precursors, some of whom were men of much learning, had especially

availed themselves of the former class of plots. [Sidenote: Plots of

Shakspere's successors.] If, passing over Shakspeare, we glance at the

plots of Fletcher, Jonson, or others of the same period, we find, among

a great diversity of means, a search for novelty universally set on

foot. Jonson is fond of inventing his plots; Beaumont and Fletcher

usually borrow theirs; but neither by the former nor the latter were

stories chosen which were familiar to the people, nor in any instance

perhaps do they condescend to use plots which had been previously

written on. [Sidenote: Beaumont and Fletcher's.] Where Beaumont and

Fletcher do avail themselves of common tales, they artfully combine them

with others, and receive assistance from complexity of adventure in

keeping their uniform purpose in view. [Sidenote: Historical Drama grew

obsolete.] The historical drama was regarded by the new school as a rude

and obsolete form; and there are scarcely half a dozen instances in

which any writer of that age, but Shakspeare, adopted it later than

1600. Historical subjects indeed wanted the coveted charm, as did also

the Romantic and the Classical Tales, both of which shared in the

neglect with which the Chronicles were treated. [Sidenote: Plots were

got from foreign novels and invention.] The Foreign Novels, and stories

partly borrowed from them, or wholly invented, were almost the sole

subjects of the newer drama, which has always the air of addressing

itself to hearers possessing greater dramatic experience and more

extended information than those who were in the view of the older

writers.

[Sidenote: Shakspere belongs to the older class of dramatists.]

Shakspeare, in point of time, stood between these two classes: does he

decidedly belong to either, or shew a leaning, and to which? He

unequivocally belongs to the older class; or rather, the opposition to

the newer writers assumes in him a far more decided shape than in any of

his immediate forerunners; for in them are found numerous exceptions to

the rule, in him scarcely one. He returns, in fact, to more than one of

the principles of the old school, which had begun in his time to fall

into disuse. [Sidenote: Compare his Histories, narrative chorus long

rymed passages,] The external form of some of his plays, particularly

his histories, is quite in the old taste. The narrative chorus is the

most observable remnant of antiquity; and the long rhymed pas[64:1]sages

frequent in his earlier works, are abundant in the older writers: Peele

uses them through whole scenes, and Marlowe likewise to excess.

[Sidenote: jesters, and choice of known stories.] His continual

introduction of those conventional characters, his favourite jesters, is

another point of resemblance to the ruder stage. [Sidenote: He's of the

school of Lodge and Greene.] And his choice of subjects, when combined

with the peculiarities of economy just noticed, as well as others,

clearly appropriates him to the school of Lodge, Greene, and those elder

writers who have left few works and fewer names. His Historical Plays

are the perfection of the old school, the only valuable specimens of

that class which it has produced, and the latest instance in which its

example was followed; and he has had recourse to the Classical story for

such subjects as approached most nearly to the nature of his English

Chronicles. [Sidenote: Of new novel stories,] And you must take especial

note, that, even in the class of subjects in which he seems to coincide

with the new school,--I mean his Plots borrowed from Foreign Novels,--he

assumes no more of conformity than its appearance, while the principle

of contrariety is still retained. [Sidenote: Shakspere chose the most

widely known.] The new writers preferred untranslated novels, and, where

they chose translated ones, disguised them till the features of the

original were lost: Shakspeare not only uses translated tales--(this

indeed from necessity)--and closely adheres to their minutest

circumstances, but in almost every instance he has made choice of those

among them which can be proved to have been most widely known and

esteemed at the time. Most of his plots founded on fanciful subjects,

whether derived from novels or other sources, can be shewn to have been

previously familiar to the people. [Sidenote: 6 Plays of Shakspere

founded on well-known stories.] The story of 'Measure for Measure' had

been previously told; that of 'As you Like It', he might have had from

either of two popular collections of tales; the fable of 'Much Ado about

Nothing' seems to have been widely spread, and those of 'All's Well that

Ends Well', and 'The Winter's Tale'; 'Romeo and Juliet' appears in at

least one collection of English novels, and in a poem which enjoyed much

popularity. These are sufficient as examples; but a still more

remarkable circumstance is this. [Sidenote: 12 on subjects of former

Plays.] In repeated instances, about twelve in all, Shakspeare has

chosen subjects on which plays had been previously written; nay more, on

the sub[65:1]jects which he has so re-written, he has produced some of

his best dramas, and one his very masterpiece. 'Julius Cæsar' belongs to

this list; '_Lear_' does so likewise; and 'HAMLET.' Is not that a

singular fact? I can use it at present only as a most valuable proof

that the view which I take is an accurate one. But Shakspeare has also,

oftener than once, applied to the chivalrous class of subjects, which

was exclusively peculiar to the older school. Its tales indeed bore a

strong likeness to his own most esteemed subjects of study; for, amidst

all their extravagancies and inconsistencies, the Gothic romances and

poems, the older of them at all events, professed in form to be

chronicles of fact, and in principle to assume historical truth as their

groundwork. [Sidenote: 3 on Classical subjects turned into romances.]

'Pericles' is founded on one of the most popular romances of the middle

ages, which had been also versified by Gower, the second father of the

English poetical school. The characters in 'The Midsummer Night's Dream'

are classical, but the costume is strictly Gothic, and shews that it was

through the medium of romance that he drew the knowledge of them; and

the 'Troilus and Cressida' presents another classical and chivalrous

subject, which Chaucer had handled at great length, also invested with

the richness of the romantic garb and decoration.

[Sidenote: Shakspere chose the story of the _Two Noble Kinsmen_.]

Fletcher and Shakspeare being thus opposed to each other in their choice

of subjects, what qualities are there in the Plot of The Two Noble

Kinsmen, which may appropriate the choice of it to either? In the first

place, it is a chivalrous subject,--a classical story which had already

been told in the Gothic style. [Sidenote: Fletcher would neither have

chosen Chaucer's classical story for his plot,] The nature of the story

then could have been no recommendation of it to Fletcher. He has not a

single other subject of the sort; he has even written one play in

ridicule of chivalrous observances; and the sarcasm of that humorous

piece[66:1], both in the general design and the particular references,

is aimed solely at the prose romances of knight-errantry, a diseased and

posthumous off-shoot from the parent-root, whose legitimate and ancient

offspring, the metrical chronicles and tales, he seems neither to have

known nor cared for. [Sidenote: nor an old story,] Secondly, this story

must have been unacceptable to Fletcher, because it was a fa[66:2]miliar

one in England. This fact is perhaps sufficiently proved by its being

the subject of that animated and admirable poem of Chaucer, which Dryden

has pronounced little inferior to the Iliad or Æneid; but it is still

more distinctly shewn by a third fact, which completely clenches the

argument against Fletcher's choice of it as a subject. [Sidenote: nor

one on which two 16th-century plays had been written.] No fewer than two

plays had been written on this story before the end of the sixteenth

century; the earlier of the two, the Palamon and Arcite of Edwards,

acted in 1566, and printed in 1585, and another play called by the same

name, brought on the stage in 1594.[66:3]

[Sidenote: Fletcher didn't choose the subject of _The Two Noble

Kinsmen_.]

It is thus, I think, proved almost to demonstration, that the person who

chose this subject was not Fletcher; and what has been already said,

even without the specific evidence of individual passages, creates a

strong probability that the choice was made by Shakspeare rather than by

any other dramatic poet of his time. If the question be merely one

between the two writers,--if, assuming it to be proved that Shakspeare

wrote parts of the play, we have only to ask which of the two it was

that chose the subject,--we can surely be at no loss to decide.

[Sidenote: Shakspere's study of chivalrous poetry.] But the presumption

in Shakspeare's favour may be elevated almost into absolute certainty,

while, at the same time, some important qualities of his will be

illustrated,--if we inquire what was the real extent to which he

attached himself to the study of the chivalrous poetry, from which this

subject is taken, and the influence which that study was likely to have

had, and did actually exercise on his writings.

If, being told that a dramatic poet was born in England in the latter

half of the sixteenth century, whose studies, for all effectual benefit

which they could have afforded him, were limited to his own tongue, we

were asked to say what course his acquisitions were likely to have

taken, our reply would be ready and unhesitating. English literature was

of narrow extent before the time in question, and, according to the

invariable progress of mental culture, had been evolved first in those

finer branches which issue primarily from the ima[67:1]gination and

affections, and appeal for their effect to the principles in which they

have their source. [Sidenote: Shakspere certain to have first studi'd,

and been influenct by, our old narrative poets,] Poetry had reached a

vigorous youth, history was in its infancy, philosophy had not come into

being. Had the field of study been wider, it was to poetry in an

especial manner that a poet had to betake himself for an experience and

skill in his art, and in the language which was to be its instrument.

And it was almost solely to the narrative poets that Shakspeare had to

appeal for aid and guidance; for preceding writers in the dramatic walk

could teach him little. They could serve as beacons only, and not

examples, and he had to search in other mines for the materials to rear

his palace of thought. [Sidenote: who were of the Gothic school.] But

the English poetical writers who preceded him are all more or less

impressed with the seal of the Gothic school, and the most noted among

them belong to it essentially. Chaucer, Lydgate, and Gower, to more than

one of whom Shakspeare is materially indebted, were the heads of a sect

whose subjects and form of composition were varied only as the various

forms and subjects of the foreign romantic writers. [Sidenote: Britain

the mother of much fine chivalrous poetry.] The rhymed romance, the

metrical vision, the sustained allegorical narrative or dialogue, were

but differing results of the same principle, and forms too of its

original development; for Britain was the mother and nurse of much of

the finest chivalrous poetry, as well as the scene where some of its

most fascinating tales are laid. It is true that English poetry before

the time of Elizabeth presents but few distinguished names; but there is

a world of unappropriated treasures of the chivalrous class of poetry,

which are still the delight of those who possess the key to their secret

chambers, and were the archetypes of the earlier poets of that prolific

age. It is important to recollect, that among the poets who adorn that

epoch, the narrative preceded the dramatic. [Sidenote: Spenser belongs

to the Gothic school.] Spenser belongs, in every view, to the romantic

or Gothic school; the heroic Mort d'Arthur was the rule of his poetical

faith; and it was that school, headed by him, which Shakspeare, on

commencing his course and choosing his path, found in possession of all

the popularity of the day. [Sidenote: Shakspere too.] Every thing proves

that he allowed himself to be guided by the prevailing taste. His early

poems belong in design to Spenser's school, and their style is

[68:1]often imitative of his. In his dramas he has many points of

resemblance to the older chivalrous poets, besides his occasional

adoption of their subjects. His respect for Gower is shewn by the

repeated introduction of his shade as the speaker in his choruses[68:2];

and particular allusions and images, borrowed from Gothic usages and

chivalrous facts, occur at the first blush to the recollection of every

one. But there is a more widely spread influence than all this.

[Sidenote: Shakspere's mistakes and] Many of his most faulty

peculiarities are directly drawn from this source, and his innumerable

misrepresentations or mistakes are not so truly the fruit of his own

ignorance, as the necessary qualities of the class of poets to which he

belonged, shared with him by some of the greatest poetical names which

modern Europe can cite. [Sidenote: anomalies, those of his Gothic

school.] In this situation are indeed almost all the irregularities and

anomalies which have furnished the unbelievers in the divinity of his

genius with objects of contemptuous abuse;--his creation of geographies

wholly fictitious,--his anachronisms in facts and customs,--his

misstatements of historical detail,--his dukes and kings in

republics,--his harbours in the heart of continents, and his journies

over land to remote islands,--his heathenism in Christian lands and

times, and his bishops, and priests, and masses, _in partibus

infidelium_. [Sidenote: Chaucer and Spenser had the like.] We may

censure him for these irregularities if we will; but it is incumbent on

us to recollect that Chaucer and Spenser must bear the same sentence:

and if the faults are considered so weighty as to shut out from our

notice the works in which they are found, the early literature, not of

our own country only, but of the whole of continental Europe, must be

thrown aside as one mass of unworthy fable.

In truth, Shakspeare, in throwing himself on a style of thought and a

track of study which exposed him to such errors, did no more than retire

towards those principles which not only were the sources of poetry in

his own country, but are the fountains from which, in every nation, her

first draughts of inspiration are drunk. [Sidenote: Poetry is first a

falsifying of History,] Poetry in its earlier stages is universally

neither more nor less than a falsifying of history. The decoration of

the Real is an exertion of the fancy which marks an age elder than the

creation of the purely Ideal; it is an effort more successful than the

[69:1]attempt which follows it, and the wholly fictitious has always the

appearance of being resorted to from necessity rather than choice.

Cathay is an older and fitter seat of romance than Utopia; and the

historical paladins and soldans are characters more poetical than the

creatures of pure imagination who displaced them. [Sidenote: and has

Ignorance as her ally.] [Sidenote: Her errors depend on the kind of her

small knowledge.] But this walk of poetry is one in which she never can

permanently linger; her citadel indeed is real existence partially

comprehended, but she is unable to defend the fortress after knowledge

has begun to sap its outworks; she needs ignorance for her ally while

she occupies the domain of history, and when that companion deserts her,

she unwillingly retreats on the Possible and Invented[69:2], where she

has no enemy to contest her possession of the ground.--While however she

does continue in her older haunt, she must sometimes wander out of her

imperfectly defined path, and her errors will depend, both in kind and

in amount, on the amount and kind of her knowledge. That the qualities

of poetical literature, in every nation, are dependent on the number and

species of those experiences from which in each particular case the art

receives its materials, is indeed too evident to need illustration; but

some curious inferences are deducible from an application of this truth

to the contrast which is found between the poetical literature of modern

Europe, and that older school which has been called the classical.

[Sidenote: And hence come distinctive qualities of the Greek and Modern

school.] The inherent excellencies of the ancient Greek poetry may yet

remain to be accounted for from other causes; but this one principle was

adequate to produce the most distinguishing qualities of the pagan

literature, while it is distinctly the very same principle, acting in

different circumstances, which has given birth to the opposite character

of the modern school of invention. [Sidenote: Middle-Age knowledge of

vast extent, but never thorough.] During the period which witnessed the

gradual rise of that anomalous fabric of poetry, from whose prostrate

fragments the perfected literature of Christian Europe has been erected,

knowledge (I am uttering no paradox) was of vast extent; it embraced

many different ages and many distant regions: but it was also

universally imperfect; much was known in part, but nothing wholly.

[Sidenote: So it invested History with incongruous attributes.] Hence

proceeded the specific difference of that widely-spread form of poetical

invention, namely, the super-abundance and incongruity of attributes

with which [70:1]it invested historical truth; and it is not very

difficult to discover why many of those attributes have never thoroughly

amalgamated with the principal mass. The various sources from which the

materials of the romantic poetry were drawn, present themselves at once

to every mind. [Sidenote: Early modern poets invented a national and

original literature,] By the peculiar state of their knowledge, and the

rude activity of spirit which was its consequence, the early poets of

modern Europe were prepared to invent a species of literature which

should be strictly national in its subjects, and in its essential parts

wholly original. That new branch was exposed, however, to modifications

of various kinds. One temptation to introduce foreign elements, by which

its authors were assailed, was singularly strong, and can scarcely in

any other instance have operated on a literature arising in

circumstances otherwise so favourable to originality, as those in which

they were placed. [Sidenote: but, knowing classics badly,] That

temptation was offered by the imperfect acquaintance with the classical

authors which formed one part of their scattered and ill-reconciled

knowledge. [Sidenote: grafted on their own works excrescences from

classical literature,] They were influenced by this cause, as they could

not have failed to be; and the representations of feelings, habits, and

thought, which they borrowed from this source, being in their nature

dissimilar to the constituent parts of the system to which they were

adjected, never could have harmonised with these, and, under any

circumstances, must have always continued to be excrescences. Other

elements of the new system were naturally neither evil in themselves,

nor inconsistent with the principles with which it was attempted to

combine them, but have assumed the aspect of deformity and incongruity

solely from incidental and extraneous causes. [Sidenote: and on History,

fictions and mistakes.] The fictions and mistakes which the ignorance of

those fathers of our modern poetical learning superinduced on history

ancient and modern, and on every thing which related to the then

existing state either of the material world or of human society, were

allowable ornaments, so long as knowledge afterwards acquired did not

stamp on them the brand of falsehood; but the moment that the falsity

was exposed, and the charm of possible existence broken, those adjuncts

lost their empire over the imagination, and with it their appearance of

fitness as materials for mental activity. [Sidenote: Supernaturalism of

the Romantic Poets only believable by superstition.] In supernatural

invention, the early romantic poets [71:1]were still more unfortunate;

for when they endeavoured to colour with imaginary hues the awful

outlines of the true faith, they attempted a conjunction of holiness

with impurity, an identification of the spirit with the flesh, a

marriage between the living and the dead; the purer essence revolted

from the union, and the human mind could acquiesce in imagining it only

while it remained bound in the darkness and fetters of religious

corruption. [Sidenote: Characteristics of early Greek poetry.] Turn now

to the Grecian poetry, and mark how closely the same principles have

operated on it, although the difference of the circumstances has made

the result different. [Sidenote: its tendency to orientalism;] The first

Grecian inventors were, it is true, protected in a great measure from

the influence of any foreign literature, simply by the ignorant rudeness

of those ages of the world during which their task was performed; and

even here I have no doubt that an influence not very dissimilar did

actually operate; for there seems to be good reason for supposing that,

if we had before us the wild songs of such bards as the Thracian

Orpheus, or the old Musæus, we should find them strongly marked by that

orientalism towards which the later Greek poetry which remains to us

betrays so continual a tendency. In other respects, the spirit in which

the Greeks formed their poetical system was identical with our own.

[Sidenote: its falsification of History,] Their elder poets falsified

historical facts, invented or disguised historical characters, and

framed erroneous representations of the past in time and the distant in

place, no otherwise than did the romantic fabulists; and the classical

inventors continued to have sufficient faith placed in their fictions,

merely because knowledge advanced too slowly to allow detection of their

falsity so long as the literature of the nation continued to exist for

it as a present possession. [Sidenote: its treatment of Religion.] With

their religious belief, again, every attractive invention harmonised,

and every splendid addition was readily incorporated as a consistent

part; where all was false, a falsity the more was unperceived or

uncensured, and where sublimity and beauty were almost the only objects

sought, they were gladly accepted from whatever quarter or in whatever

shape they came.

[Sidenote: Shakspere, for his stories and form, left his own time, and

delighted in the past.]

So far as these considerations seem to elucidate the principles on which

Shakspeare proceeded, they do so by exhibiting him as withdrawing from

his own times as to his subjects and the ex[72:1]ternal form of his

works, though not as to their animating spirit,--as placing himself

delightedly amidst the rude greatness of older poetry and past ages, and

viewing life and nature from their covert, as if he had sat within a

solitary and ruined aboriginal temple, and looked out upon the valley

and the mountains from among those broken and massive columns, whose

aspect gave majesty and solemnity to the landscape which was beheld

through their moss-grown vistas. [Sidenote: Thence his faults.] So far

as these views have any force as a defence of faults detected in the

great poet, that defence is founded on the consideration that the errors

were unavoidable consequences of the system which produced so much that

was admirable, and that they were shared with him by those whom he

followed in his selection of subjects and form of writing. So far as all

that has been said on this head has a close application to the main

subject of our inquiry, its sum is briefly this. [Sidenote: Summary of

reasons why Shakspere chose the plot of _Two Noble Kinsmen_.] [Sidenote:

He went back to the school of Chaucer and Spenser; which Milton, after,

sought.] [Sidenote: Shakspere's love of old poems.] An argument arises

in favour of Shakspeare's choice of the plot of this drama, from its

general qualities, as a familiar and favourite story, and one of a class

which had been frequently used by the older dramatists; that argument

receives additional strength from the fact of this individual subject

having been previously treated in a dramatic form; and it is rendered

almost impregnable when we consider the subject particularly as a

chivalrous story, and as belonging and leading us back to that native

school to which Shakspeare, though in certain respects infected by the

exotic taste of the age, yet in essentials belonged,--the wilderness in

which Chaucer had opened up the well-head of poetry, where Gower and

Lydgate had drunk freely, and Sackville had more sparingly dipped his

brow,--the paradise through which Spenser had joyfully wandered with the

heavenly Una,--the patriarchal forest into which afterwards Milton

loved to retire from his lamp-lighted chamber, to sleep at the foot

of some huge over-hanging oak, and dream of mailed knights riding by

his resting-place, or fairy choirs dancing on the green hillocks

around,--the enchanted rose garden where Shakspeare himself gathered

those garlands of beauty, which he has described as adding glory even to

his thoughts of love.

[73:1]When in the chronicle of wasted time

I see description of the fairest wights,

_And beauty making beautiful old ryme_

In praise of ladies dead and lovely knights;

Then in the blazon of sweet beauty's best,

Of hand, of foot, of lip, of eye, of brow,

I see this antique pen would have expresst

Even such a beauty as you master now.

_Sonnet 106._

A Letter on Shakspere's Authorship of The Two Noble Kinsmen and on the characteristics of Shakspere's style and the secret of his supremacy · 第 16 / 20 章