In that prodigious monument of learning and labor, Mr. Fleay's

_Biographical Chronicle of the English Drama_, the common attribution of

these two plays to Heywood is impeached on the aesthetic score that

"they are far better than his other early work." I have carefully

endeavored to do what justice might be done to their modest allowance of

moderate merit; but whether they be Heywood's or--as Mr. Fleay, on

apparent grounds of documentary evidence, would suggest--the work of

Chettle and Day, I am certainly rather inclined to agree with the

general verdict of previous criticism, which would hardly admit their

equality and would decidedly question their claim to anything more than

equality of merit with the least admirable or memorable of Heywood's

other plays. Even the rough-hewn chronicle, "If you know not me you know

nobody," by which "the troubles of Queen Elizabeth" before her accession

are as nakedly and simply set forth in the first part as in the second

are "the building of the Royal Exchange" and "the famous victory" over

the Invincible Armada, has on the whole more life and spirit, more

interest and movement, in action as in style. The class of play to which

it belongs is historically the most curious if poetically the least

precious of all the many kinds enumerated by Heywood in earnest or by

Shakespeare in jest as popular or ambitious of popularity on the stage

for which they wrote. Aristophanic license of libel or caricature, more

or less ineffectually trammelled by the chance or the likelihood of

prosecution and repression, is common under various forms to various

ages and countries; but the serious introduction and presentation of

contemporary figures and events give to such plays as these as mixed and

peculiar a quality as though the playwright's aim or ambition had been

to unite in his humble and homespun fashion the two parts of an epic or

patriotic historian and a political or social caricaturist; a poet and a

pamphleteer on the same page, a chronicler and a jester in the same

breath. Of this Elizabethan chronicle the first part is the more

literal and prosaic in its steady servility to actual record and

registered fact: the bitterest enemy of poetic or dramatic fiction, from

William Prynne to Thomas Carlyle, might well exempt from his else

omnivorous appetite of censure so humble an example of such obsequious

and unambitious fidelity. Of fiction or imagination there is indeed next

to none. In Thomas Drue's play of "The Duchess of Suffolk," formerly and

plausibly misattributed to Heywood, part of the same ground is gone over

in much the same fashion and to much the same effect; but the subject, a

single interlude of the Marian persecution, has more unity of interest

than can be attained by any play running on the same line as Heywood's,

from the opening to the close of the most hideous episode in our

history. That the miserable life and reign of Mary Tudor should have

been "staged to the show" for the edification and confirmation of her

half-sister's subjects in Protestant and patriotic fidelity of animosity

toward Rome and Spain is less remarkable than that the same hopelessly

improper topic for historical drama should in later days have been

selected for dramatic treatment by English writers and on one occasion

by a great English poet. As there are within the range of any country's

history, authentic or traditional, periods and characters in themselves

so naturally fit and proper for transfiguration by poetry that the

dramatist who should attempt to improve on the truth--the actual or

imaginary truth accepted as fact with regard to them--would probably if

not certainly derogate from it, so are there others which cannot be

transfigured without transformation. Such a character is the last and

wretchedest victim of a religious reaction which blasted her kingdom

with the hell-fire of reviving devil-worship, and her name with the

ineffaceable brand of an inseparable and damning epithet. If even the

genius of Tennyson could not make the aspirations and the agonies of

Mary as acceptable or endurable from the dramatic or poetic point of

view as Marlowe and Shakespeare could make the sufferings of such poor

wretches as their Edward II. and Richard II., it is hardly to be

expected that the humbler if more dramatic genius of Heywood should have

triumphed over the desperate obstacle of a subject so drearily

repulsive: but it is curious that both should have attempted to tackle

the same hopeless task in the same fruitless fashion. The "chronicle

history" of Mary Tudor, had Shakespeare's self attempted it, could

scarcely have been other--if we may judge by our human and fallible

lights of the divine possibilities open to a superhuman and infallible

intelligence--than a splendid and priceless failure from the dramatic or

poetic point of view. The one chance open even to Shakespeare would have

been to invent, to devise, to create; not to modify, to adapt, to

adjust. Bloody Mary has been transfigured into a tragic and poetic

malefactress: but only by the most audacious and magnificent defiance of

history and possibility. Madonna Lucrezia Estense Borgia (to use the

proper ceremonial style adopted for the exquisitely tender and graceful

dedication of the "Asolani") died peaceably in the odor of incense

offered at her shrine in the choicest Latin verse of such accomplished

poets and acolytes as Pietro Bembo and Ercole Strozzi. Nothing more

tragic or dramatic could have been made of her peaceful and honorable

end than of the reign of Mary Tudor as recorded in history. The greatest

poet and dramatist of the nineteenth century has chosen to immortalize

them by violence--to give them a life, or to give a life to their names,

which history could not give. Neither he nor Shakespeare could have kept

faith with the torpid fact and succeeded in the creation of a living and

eternal truth. One thing may be registered to the credit, not indeed of

the dramatist or the poet, but certainly of the man and the Englishman:

the generous fair play shown to Philip II. in the scene which records

his impartial justice done upon the Spanish assassin of an English

victim. There is a characteristic manliness about Heywood's patriotism

which gives a certain adventitious interest to his thinnest or homeliest

work on any subject admitting or requiring the display of such a

quality. In the second and superior part of this dramatic chronicle it

informs the humbler comic parts with more life and spirit, though not

with heartier devotion of good-will, than the more ambitious and

comparatively though modestly high-flown close of the play: which is

indeed in the main rather a realistic comedy of city life, with forced

and formal interludes of historical pageant or event, than a regular or

even an irregular historical drama. Again the trusty cockney poet has

made his hero and protagonist of a plain London tradesman: and has made

of him at once a really noble and a heartily amusing figure. His

better-born apprentice, a sort of Elizabethan Gil Bias or Gusman

d'Alfarache, would be an excellent comic character if he had been a

little more plausibly carried through to the close of his versatile and

venturous career; as it is, the farce becomes rather impudently cheap;

though in the earlier passages of Parisian trickery and buffoonery there

is a note of broad humor which may remind us of Molière--not of course

the Molière of Tartuffe, but the Molière of M. de Pourceaugnac. The

curious alterations made in later versions of the closing scene are

sometimes though not generally for the better.

Lamb, in a passage which no reader can fail to remember, has declared

that "posterity is bound to take care" (an obligation, I fear, of a kind

which posterity is very far from careful to discharge) "that a writer

loses nothing by such a noble modesty" as that which induced Heywood to

set as little store by his dramatic works as could have been desired in

the rascally interest of those "harlotry players" who thought it,

forsooth, "against their peculiar profit to have them come in print."

But I am not sure that it was altogether a noble or at all a rational

modesty which made him utter the avowal or the vaunt: "It never was any

great ambition in me, to be in this kind voluminously read." For, eight

years after this well-known passage was in print, when publishing a

"Chronographicall History of all the Kings, and memorable passages of

this Kingdome, from Brute to the Reigne of our Royall Soveraigne King

Charles," he offers, on arriving at the accession of Elizabeth, "an

apologie of the Author" for slurring or skipping the record of her life

and times in a curious passage which curiously omits as unworthy of

mention his dramatic work on the subject, while complacently enumerating

his certainly less valuable and memorable other tributes to the great

queen's fame as follows: "To write largely of her troubles, being a

princesse, or of her rare and remarkable Reigne after she was Queen, I

should but feast you with dyet twice drest: Having my selfe published a

discourse of the first: from her cradle to her crowne; and in another

bearing Title of the nine worthy Women: she being the last of the rest

in time and place; though equall to any of the former both in religious

vertue, and all masculine magnanimity." This surely looks but too much

as though the dramatist and poet thought more of the chronicler and

compiler than of the truer Heywood whose name is embalmed in the

affection and admiration of his readers even to this day; as though the

author of "A Challenge for Beauty," "The Fair Maid of the West," and

"A Woman Killed with Kindness," must have hoped and expected to be

remembered rather as the author of "Troja Britannica," "Gynaikeion,"

"The Hierarchie of the Blessed Angels," and even this "Life of Merlin,

sirnamed Ambrosius. His Prophesies, and Predictions Interpreted; and

their truth made good by our English Annalls": undoubtedly, we may

believe, "a Subject never published in this kind before, and deserves"

(_sic_) "to be knowne and observed by all men." Here follows the motto:

"Quotque aderant Vates, rebar adesse Deos." The biographer and

chronographer would apparently have been less flattered than surprised

to hear that he would be remembered rather as the creator of Frankford,

Mountferrers, and Geraldine, than as the chronicler of King Brute, Queen

Elizabeth, and King James.

The singular series of plays which covers much the same ground as

Caxton's immortal and delightful chronicle of the "Histories" of Troy

may of course have been partially inspired by that most enchanting

"recuyell": but Heywood, as will appear on collation or confrontation

of the dramatist with the historian, must have found elsewhere the

suggestion of some of his most effective episodes. The excellent

simplicity and vivacity of style, the archaic abruptness of action and

presentation, are equally noticeable throughout all the twenty-five acts

which lead us from the opening of the Golden to the close of the Iron

Age; but there is a no less perceptible advance or increase of dramatic

and poetic invention in the ten acts devoted to the tale of Troy and its

sequel. Not that there is anywhere any want of good simple spirited

work, homely and lively and appropriate to the ambitious humility of the

design; a design which aims at making popular and familiar to the

citizens of Elizabethan London the whole cycle of heroic legend from the

reign of Saturn to the death of Helen. Jupiter, the young hero of the

first two plays and ages, is a really brilliant and amusing mixture of

Amadis, Sigurd, and Don Juan: the pretty scene in which his infant life

is spared and saved must be familiar, and pleasantly familiar, to all

worthy lovers of Charles Lamb. The verse underlined and immortalized by

his admiration--"For heaven's sake, when you kill him, hurt him

not"--should suffice to preserve and to embalm the name of the writer.

I can scarcely think that a later scene, apparently imitated from the

most impudent idyl of Theocritus, can have been likely to elevate the

moral tone of the young gentleman who must have taken the part of

Callisto; but the honest laureate of the city, stern and straightforward

as he was in the enforcement of domestic duties and contemporary morals,

could be now and then as audacious in his plebeian fashion as even

Fletcher himself in his more patrician style of realism. There is spirit

of a quiet and steady kind in the scenes of war and adventure that

follow: Heywood, like Caxton before him, makes of Saturn and the Titans

very human and simple figures, whose doings and sufferings are presented

with child-like straightforwardness in smooth and fluent verse and in

dialogue which wants neither strength nor ease nor propriety. The

subsequent episode of Danaë is treated with such frank and charming

fusion of realism and romance as could only have been achieved in the

age of Shakespeare. To modern readers it may seem unfortunate for

Heywood that a poet who never (to the deep and universal regret of all

competent readers) followed up the dramatic promise of his youth, as

displayed in the nobly vivid and pathetic little tragedy of "Sir Peter

Harpdon's End," should in our day have handled the story of Danaë and

the story of Bellerophon so effectively as to make it impossible for the

elder poet either to escape or to sustain comparison with the author of

"The Earthly Paradise"; but the most appreciative admirers of Morris

will not be the slowest or the least ready to do justice to the

admirable qualities displayed in Heywood's dramatic treatment of these

legends. The naturally sweet and spontaneous delicacy of the later poet

must not be looked for in the homely and audacious realism of Heywood;

in whose work the style of the Knight's Tale and the style of the

Miller's Tale run side by side and hand in hand.

From the Golden Age to the Iron Age the growth and ascent of Heywood's

dramatic power may fairly be said to correspond in a reversed order with

the degeneracy and decline of human heroism and happiness in the

legendary gradation or degradation of the classical four ages. "The

Golden Age" is a delightful example of dramatic poetry in its simplest

and most primary stage; in "The Silver Age" the process of evolution is

already visible at work. Bellerophon and Aurea cannot certainly be

compared with the Joseph and Phraxanor of Charles Wells: but the curt

and abrupt scene in which they are hastily thrust on the stage and as

hastily swept off it is excellently composed and written. The highest

possible tribute to the simple and splendid genius of Plautus is paid by

the evidence of the fact that all his imitators have been obliged to

follow so closely on the lines of his supernatural, poetical, and

farcical comedy of Amphitryon. Heywood, Rotrou, Molière, and Dryden have

sat at his feet and copied from his dictation like school-boys. The

French pupils, it must be admitted, have profited better and shown

themselves apter and happier disciples than the English. I cannot think

that even Molière has improved on the text of Rotrou as much, or nearly

as much, as he has placed himself under unacknowledged obligation to his

elder countryman: but in Dryden's version there is a taint of greasy

vulgarity, a reek of obtrusive ruffianism, from which Heywood's version

is as clean as Shakespeare's could have been, had he bestowed on the

"Amphitruo" the honor he conferred on the "Menaechmi." The power of

condensation into a few compact scenes of material sufficient for five

full acts is a remarkable and admirable gift of Heywood's.

After the really dramatic episode in which he had the advantage of

guidance by the laughing light of a greater comic genius than his own,

Heywood contentedly resumes the simple task of arranging for the stage a

mythological chronicle of miscellaneous adventure. The jealousy of Juno

is naturally the mainspring of the action and the motive which affords

some show of connection or coherence to the three remaining acts of "The

Silver Age": the rape of Proserpine, the mourning and wandering and

wrath of Ceres, are treated with so sweet and beautiful a simplicity of

touch that Milton may not impossibly have embalmed and transfigured some

reminiscence of these scenes in a passage of such heavenly beauty as

custom cannot stale. Another episode, and one not even indirectly

connected with the labors of Hercules, is the story of Semele, handled

with the same simple and straightforward skill of dramatic exposition,

the same purity and fluency of blameless and spontaneous verse, that

distinguish all parts alike of this dramatic chronicle. The second of

the five plays composing it closes with the rescue of Proserpine by

Hercules, and the judgment of Jupiter on "the Arraignment of the Moon."

In "The Brazen Age" there is somewhat more of dramatic unity or

coherence than in the two bright easy-going desultory plays which

preceded it: it closes at least with a more effective catastrophe than

either of them in the death of Hercules. However far inferior to the

haughty and daring protest or appeal in which Sophocles, speaking

through the lips of the virtuous Hyllus, impeaches and denounces the

iniquity of heaven with a steadfast and earnest vehemence unsurpassed in

its outspoken rebellion by any modern questioner or blasphemer of divine

providence, the simple and humble sincerity of the English playwright

has given a not unimpressive or inharmonious conclusion to the same

superhuman tragedy. In the previous presentation of the story of

Meleager, Heywood has improved upon the brilliant and passionate

rhetoric of Ovid by the introduction of an original and happy touch of

dramatic effect: his Althaea, after firing the brand with which her

son's life is destined to burn out, relents and plucks it back for a

minute from the flame, giving the victim a momentary respite from

torture, a fugitive recrudescence of strength and spirit, before she

rekindles it. The pathos of his farewell has not been overpraised by

Lamb: who might have added a word in recognition of the very spirited

and effective suicide of Althaea, not unworthily heralded or announced

in such verses as these:

This was my son,

Born with sick throes, nursed from my tender breast,

Brought up with feminine care, cherished with love;

His youth my pride; his honor all my wishes;

So dear, that little less he was than life.

The subsequent adventures of Hercules and the Argonauts are presented

with the same quiet straightforwardness of treatment: it is curious that

the tragic end of Jason and Medea should find no place in the

multifarious chronicle which is nominally and mainly devoted to the

record of the life and death of Hercules, but into which the serio-comic

episode of Mars and Venus and Vulcan is thrust as crudely and abruptly

as it is humorously and dramatically presented. The rivalry of Omphale

and Deianeira for their hero's erratic affection affords a lively and

happy mainspring--not suggested by Caxton--for the tragic action and

passion of the closing scenes.

At the opening of "The Iron Age," nineteen years later in date of

publication, we find ourselves at last arrived in a province of dramatic

poetry where something of consecutive and coherent action is apparently

the aim if not always the achievement of the writer. These ten acts do

really constitute something like a play, and a play of serious, various,

progressive, and sustained interest, beginning with the elopement and

closing with the suicide of Helen. There is little in it to suggest the

influence of either Homer or Shakespeare: whose "Troilus and Cressida"

had appeared in print, for the helplessly bewildered admiration of an

eternally mystified world, just twenty-three years before. The only

figure equally prominent in either play is that of Thersites: but

Heywood, happily and wisely, has made no manner of attempt to rival or

to reproduce the frightful figure of the intelligent Yahoo in which the

sane and benignant genius of Shakespeare has for once anticipated and

eclipsed the mad and malignant genius of Swift. It should be needless to

add that his Ulysses has as little of Shakespeare's as of Homer's: and

that the brutalization or degradation of the god-like figures of Ajax

and Achilles is only less offensive in the lesser than in the greater

poet's work. In the friendly duel between Hector and Ajax the very text

of Shakespeare is followed with exceptional and almost servile fidelity:

but the subsequent exchange of gifts is, of course, introduced in

imitation of earlier and classic models. The contest of Ajax and Ulysses

is neatly and spiritedly cast into dramatic form: Ovid, of course,

remains unequalled, as he who runs may read in Dryden's grand

translation, but Heywood has done better--to my mind at least--than

Shirley was to do in the next generation; though it is to be noted that

Shirley has retained more of the magnificent original than did his

immediate precursor: but the death of Ajax is too pitiful a burlesque to

pass muster even as a blasphemous travestie of the sacred text of

Sophocles. In the fifth play of this pentalogy Heywood has to cope with

no such matchless models or precursors; and it is perhaps the brightest

and most interesting of the five. Sinon is a spirited and rather amusing

understudy of Thersites: his seduction of Cressida is a grotesquely

diverting variation on the earlier legend relating to the final fall of

the typical traitress; and though time and space are wanting for the

development or indeed the presentation of any more tragic or heroic

character, the rapid action of the last two acts is workmanlike in its

simple fashion: the complicated or rather accumulated chronicle of crime

and retribution may claim at least the credit due to straightforward

lucidity of composition and sprightly humility of style.

In "Love's Mistress; or, The Queen's Masque," the stage chronicler or

historian of the Four Ages appears as something more of a dramatic poet:

his work has more of form and maturity, with no whit less of spontaneity

and spirit, simplicity and vivacity. The framework or setting of these

five acts, in which Midas and Apuleius play the leading parts, is

sustained with lively and homely humor from induction to epilogue: the

story of Psyche is thrown into dramatic form with happier skill and more

graceful simplicity by Heywood than afterward by Molière and Corneille;

though there is here nothing comparable with the famous and exquisite

love scene in which the genius of Corneille renewed its youth and

replumed its wing with feathers borrowed from the heedless and hapless

Théophile's. The fortunes of Psyche in English poetry have been as

curious and various as her adventures on earth and elsewhere. Besides

and since this pretty little play of Heywood's, she has inspired a long

narrative poem by Marmion, one of the most brilliant and independent of

the younger comic writers who sat at the feet or gathered round the

shrine of Ben Jonson; a lyrical drama by William the Dutchman's poet

laureate, than which nothing more portentous in platitude ever crawled

into print, and of which the fearfully and wonderfully wooden verse

evoked from Shadwell's great predecessor in the office of court

rhymester an immortalizing reference to "Prince Nicander's vein"; a

magnificent ode by Keats, and a very pretty example of metrical romance

by Morris.

The Age of Shakespeare · 第 11 / 16 段