"Connection of the _Indian Emperor_ to the _Indian Queen_.
"The conclusion of the _Indian Emperor_ (part of which poem was
written by me) left little matter for another story to be built
on, there remaining but two of the considerable characters alive,
viz. Montezuma and Orazia: thereupon the author of this thought it
necessary to produce new persons from the old ones; and considering
the late Indian Queen, before she loved Montezuma, lived in
clandestine marriage with her great general Traxalla, from those
two he has raised a son and two daughters, supposed to be grown up
to man and woman's estate, and their mother Orazia (for whom there
was no further use in the story) lately dead. So that you are to
imagine about twenty years elapsed since the coronation of Montezuma,
who in the truth of the history was a great and glorious prince,
and in whose time happened the discovery and invasion of Mexico
by the Spaniards (under the command of Cortez), who joined with
the Traxallan Indians, the inveterate enemies of Montezuma, wholly
subverted that flourishing empire, the conquest of which is the
subject of this dramatic poem.
"I have neither wholly followed the story, nor varied from it, and,
as near as I could, have traced the native simplicity and ignorance
of the Indians in relation to European customs: the shipping, armour,
horses, swords, and guns of the Spaniards, being as new to them as
their habits and manners were to the Christians.
"The difference of their religion from ours, I have taken from the
story itself; and that which you find of it in the first and fifth
acts, touching the sufferings and constancy of Montezuma in his
opinions, I have only illustrated, not altered from those who have
written of it.
"JOHN DRYDEN."
[227] Some eighteen or twenty years ago, a person of quality in
the neighbourhood of Lichfield, dragged together a shoal of little
holiday fry, to give an infantine exhibition of a new sentimental
comedy.
A spacious Gothic gallery made an admirable theatre, and for
scenery--there was an excellent substitute, in many a mouldering
breadth of ancient tapestry, which represented in horrid guise the
direful tale of Herod's Cruelty. By the hour announced for the
theatrical _début_ of these unfledged actors, the house overflowed.
Though the circumstance is not recorded by either Boswell or Sir
John Hawkins, a late celebrated moralist was one of the audience.
To the beginning of the fifth act he stayed with more patience than
could have been expected; at this time he exhibited evident marks of
_ennui_ and lassitude--yawned three times, and attempted to make his
exit. The lady of the mansion cut off his retreat with, "'Pon honour,
Doctor Johnson, you must not go! How can you think of leaving the
theatre when my Dicky is in so interesting a situation?" "Madam,"
replied the sage, "with the plot of your play I was unacquainted, and
have waited thus long in the hope that it would turn out a tragedy;
I might then have seen how naturally little Dicky and his dramatic
associates would have died! I now perceive that the author will
neither introduce aconite nor a bare bodkin, and have no prospect of
a pathetic termination but in Herod or some of his tapestry hang-dogs
starting into life. Should these murderous ruffians once step upon
the stage, all your pretty innocents will most assuredly be put to
the sword!"
[228] In the third volume of this work, which was compiled from
Hogarth's manuscripts, and published some time after the two which
precede it, there is a catalogue of all his prints, and the editor
has endeavoured to add a more perfect list of the numerous variations
than has been hitherto given to the public.
[229] In a marginal leaf of the late Doctor Lort's _Trusler_, I
found a piece of a newspaper with the following remarks (neither
the date nor title of the paper were inserted): "Whether the late
extraordinary sums paid for the works of Hogarth at Mr. Gulston's
sale are to be regarded on the whole as proofs of our artist's merit,
or of extravagance in our modern collectors, I shall not venture to
determine; and yet the following statement of the rapid advance in
the value of prints from this celebrated master may furnish notices
to assist the judgment of your readers:--
"In 1780, Mr. Walpole obliged the world with a fourth volume of his
_Anecdotes of Painting in England_. In this entertaining performance
was comprised the first catalogue of Hogarth's pieces. I say the
first, for every preceding enumeration of them was defective in
the extreme. This was succeeded in 1781 by a publication from the
ingenious and accurate Mr. Nichols, who considerably enlarged and
amended the list made by his predecessor.
"In the same year, Mr. Bailley's collection, which would now be
deemed an imperfect one, was sold at Christie's for £61, 10s. In 1782
it was resold, with some additions, at Barford's for £105.
"In 1785, the late Mr. Henderson of Covent Garden Theatre disposed of
his collection, by far less complete than either of the foregoing,
for £126.
"In 1786, Mr. Gulston's was sold piecemeal by Mr. Greenwood; and
though the condition of all such articles in it, as real taste and
common sense would style the most valuable, were very indifferent,
the whole series is reported to have brought in upwards of £600.[230]
At this auction, the plates now to be particularized were knocked
down at the following rates, though taken altogether they were scarce
worth the money paid for the cheapest of them:--
Two engravings on plate £4 14 6
Three ditto 3 10 0
Small arms of the Duchess of Kendal 4 0 0
Large ditto 6 0 0
Arms of Lord Aylmer 7 10 0
Arms unknown, with women as terms 6 10 0
Two ditto 1 11 6
Impression from a tankard 10 0 0
Hogarth's shop-bill and another 11 15 0
Rape of the Lock; impression from a gold snuff-box
presented to Mr. Pope 33 0 0
Scene of Evening, without the girl 40 8 6
"Should the celebrity of the delightful mock heroic poem, or the
rareness of an imperfect play tending to show that a complete design
is not always to be hit at once even by a Hogarth, furnish some
apology for the purchase of the two last articles, what excuse can be
invented for the collectors who bought the preceding trash on terms
so ridiculously high? Of all the trifling works of art, coats of
arms must be reckoned the most contemptible. These early productions
of our author on silver tea-tables, mugs, and waiters, have no sort
of merit to recommend them, nor were ever meant to be impressed on
paper (except as in momentary satisfaction to the engraver); for
being there reversed, like the prayers of witches, they must be read
backwards. Besides, what taste or genius can be manifested in the
disposition of a cat's whiskers or a fox's tail; in the emblazonry of
a black swan with two necks, or a blue boar with gilded tail? What
abilities are requisite for the expansion of an old woman's furred
cloak (very pompously denominated a mantle) at the back of a shield,
or for inscribing some bright sentence or wretched pun (yclep'd a
motto) in Gothic Latin on a ribbon fantastically waved? For the
design in which nature and manners are displayed, no praise can be
too exalted; but as for his heraldry,--his representation of birds
and beasts that never had existence,--
"A dragon, and a finless fish,
A clip-wing'd griffin, and a molten raven,
And such a deal of skimble-skamble stuff,"--
these can never be allowed to contribute a single leaf to the chaplet
he has so long and so deservedly worn.
"I have dwelt the more on these things, because I am assured there
are print-dealers now rummaging the books of our oldest engravers,
in the hope that a still greater number of useless and insignificant
particulars consisting of arms, etc., imputable to Hogarth, will
be found; nor are their hopes less sanguine that the madness of
collectors will be confirmed instead of cured by the examples hung
out at the late auction in Leicester Fields.
"Let me hope, however, that for the future every sensible collector
will think his assemblage of Hogarth's prints sufficiently complete,
without the foolish adjuncts already described and reprobated. For
the authenticity of these trifles being obvious to no kind of proof,
they principally tend to expose their purchasers to the frauds of
designing people, who will laugh at their credulity while they pocket
their cash."
[230] A short time before this, the writer of these volumes had the
honour of furnishing his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales with a
set of Hogarth's works. They consisted of remarkably fine impressions
from his most valuable plates, many of the variations, and some which
were deemed scarce (though not one of either the large or small coat
of arms). For the two volumes he charged and received £84.
[231] See the manner of disgracing the most serious subjects in many
celebrated old pictures, by introducing low, absurd, and obscure, and
often profane, circumstances into them.
[232]
"What shall withstand old Time's devouring hand?
Where's Troy? and where's the Maypole in the Strand?"
[233] I may be told that this is a mistake, and that it was either to
Pope or Swift. It was the fate of Arbuthnot to twine laurel for the
brows of his friends. I know it was a partnership account, but surely
the Doctor was first in the firm.
[234] See the introduction to the _Memoirs of Scriblerus_.
[235] Should any Lord, Knight, Esquire, or spirited Bookseller,
choose to purchase the whole copy, I am ready to treat with him upon
proper terms.
[236] The writer of a modern book of travels, relating the
particulars of his being cast away, thus concludeth: "After having
walked eleven hours without tracing the print of a human foot, to
my great comfort and delight I saw a man hanging upon a gibbet:
my pleasure at this cheering prospect was inexpressible, for it
convinced me that I was in a civilised country!"
* * * * *
_SEASON 1874._
[Illustration]