Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB
[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]
[graphic][merged small][merged small]

THE original quarto edition of Troilus and Cressida was printed in 1609. No other edition of the play was published until it appeared in the folio collection of 1623.

"The original story," says Dryden, "was written by one Lollius, a Lombard, in Latin verse, and translated by Chaucer into English; intended, I suppose, as a satire on the inconstancy of women. I find nothing of it among the ancients, not so much as the name of Cressida once mentioned. Shakspere (as I hinted), in the apprenticeship of his writing, modelled it into that play which is now called by the name of 'Troilus and Cressida."" Without entering into the question who Lollius was, we at once receive the "Troilus and Creseide' of Chaucer as the foundation of Shakspere's play. Of his perfect acquaintance with that poem there can be no doubt. Chaucer, of all English writers, was the one who would have the greatest charm for Shakspere. Mr. Godwin has justly observed that the Shaksperean commentators have done injustice to Chaucer in not more distinctly associating his poem with this remarkable play. But although the main incidents in the adventures of the Greek lover and his faithless mistress, as given by Chaucer, are followed with little deviation, yet, independent of the wonderful

difference in the characterisation, the whole story under the treatment of Shakspere becomes thoroughly original. In no play does he appear to us to have a more complete mastery over his materials, or to mould them into more plastic shapes by the force of his most surpassing imagination. The great Homeric poem, the rude romance of the destruction of Troy, the beautiful elaboration of that romance by Chaucer, are all subjected to his wondrous alchemy; and new forms and combinations are called forth so lifelike, that all the representations which have preceded them look cold and rigid statues, not warm and breathing men and women. Coleridge's theory of the principle upon which this was effected is, we have no doubt, essentially true:

"I am half inclined to believe that Shakspere's main object (or shall I rather say his ruling impulse?) was to translate the poetic. heroes of Paganism into the not less rude, but more intellectually vigorous, and more featurely, warriors of Christian chivalry, and to substantiate the distinct and graceful profiles or outlines of the Homeric epic into the flesh and blood of the romantic drama,in short, to give a grand history-piece in the robust style of Albert Dürer." "

[ocr errors]

a

Literary Remains,' vol. ii. p. 183.

the exception to Shakspere's general idea of the female character. She is beautiful, witty, accomplished, but she is impure. In her, love is not a sentiment, or a passion,

Dryden, we have seen, speaks of Shakspere's Troilus and Cressida' as a work of his apprenticeship. Dryden himself aspired to reform it with his own master-hand. The notion of Dryden was to convert the 'Troilus-it is an impulse. Temperament is stronger and Cressida' into a regular tragedy. He complains that "the chief persons who give name to the tragedy are left alive: Cressida is false, and is not punished." The excitement of pity and terror, we are told, is the only ground of tragedy. Tragedy, too, must have "a moral that directs the whole action of the play to one centre." To this standard, then, is Shakspere's 'Troilus and Cressida' to be reduced. The chief persons who give name to the tragedy are not to be left alive. Cressida is not to be false; but she is to die and so terror and pity are to be produced. And then comes the moral :

"Then, since from home-bred factions ruin springs, Let subjects learn obedience to their kings." The management by which Dryden has accomplished this metamorphosis is one of the most remarkable examples of perverted ingenuity. He had a licentious age to please. He could not spare a line, or a word, of what may be considered the objectionable scenes between Pandarus, Troilus, and Cressida. They formed no part of the "rubbish" he desired to remove. He has heightened them wherever possible; and what in Shakspere was a sly allusion becomes with him a positive grossness. Now let us consider for a moment what Shakspere intended by these scenes. Cressida is

than will. Her love has nothing ideal, spiritual, in its composition. It is not constant, because it is not discriminate. Setting apart her inconstancy, how altogether different is Cressida from Juliet, or Viola, or Helena, or Perdita! There is nothing in her which could be called love: no depth, no concentration of feeling,nothing that can bear the name of devotion. Shakspere would not permit a mistake to be made on the subject; and he has therefore given to Ulysses to describe her, as he conceived her. Considering what his intentions were, and what really is the high morality of the characterisation, we can scarcely say that he has made the representation too prominent. When he drew Cressida, we think he had the feeling strong on his mind which gave birth to the 129th Sonnet. A French writer, in a notice of this play, says, "Les deux amants se voient, s'entendent, et sont heureux." Shakspere has described such happiness :

[ocr errors][merged small]
[graphic][merged small]

PRIAM, King of Troy.

Appears, Act II. sc. 2. Act V. sc. 3.

HECTOR, Son to Priam.

Appears, Act I. sc. 2. Act II. sc. 2. Act IV. sc. 5.

Act V. sc. 1; sc. 3; sc. 4; sc. 6; sc. 9.
TROILUS, son to Priam.

Appears, Act I. sc. 1; sc. 2. Act II. sc. 2. Act III. sc. 2.
Act IV. sc. 2; sc. 3; sc. 4; sc. 5.

Act V. sc. 1; sc. 2; sc. 3; sc. 4; sc. 6; sc. 11.
PARIS, son to Priam.

Appears, Act I. sc. 2. Act II. sc. 2. Act III. sc. 1.
Act IV. sc. 1; sc. 3; sc. 4;

sc. 8.

DEIPHOBUS, son to Priam.
Appears, Act IV. sc. 1; sc. 3; sc. 4.

HELENUS, son to Priam.
Appears, Act I. sc. 2. Act II. sc. 2.

ENEAS, a Trojan commander.

Appears, Act I. sc. 1; sc. 2; sc. 3.
Act IV. sc. 1; sc. 2; sc. 3; sc. 4; sc. 5.
Act V. sc. 2; sc. 11.

ANTENOR, a Trojan commander.

Appears, Act I. sc. 2. Act IV. sc. 1; sc. 3; sc. 4. CALCHAS, a Trojan priest, taking part with

the Greeks.

Appears, Act III. sc. 3.

PANDARUS, uncle to Cressida.

Appears, Act I. sc. 1; sc. 2. Act III. sc. 1; sc. 2. Act IV. sc. 2; sc. 4. Act V. sc. 3; sc. 11. MARGARELON, a bastard son to Priam. Appears, Act V. sc. 8.

AGAMEMNON, the Grecian general. Appears, Act I. sc. 3. Act II. sc. 3. Act III. sc. 3. Act IV. sc. 5. Act V. sc. 1; sc. 5; sc. 10.

MENELAUS, brother to Agamemnon. Appears, Act I. sc. 3. Act III. sc. 3. Act IV. sc. 5. Act V. sc. 1; sc. 8; sc. 10.

ACHILLES, a Grecian commander. Appears, Act II. sc. 1; sc. 3. Act III. sc. 3. Act IV. sc. 5. Act V. sc. 1; sc. 5; sc. 6; sc. 7; sc. 9.

[blocks in formation]

NESTOR, a Grecian commander.

Appears, Act I. sc. 3. Act II. sc. 3. Act III. sc. 3. Act IV. sc. 5. Act V. sc. 1; sc. 5; sc. 10.

DIOMEDES, a Grecian commander. Appears, Act II. sc. 3. Act III. sc. 3. Act IV. sc. 1; sc. 3; sc. 4; sc. 5. Act V. sc. 1; sc. 2; sc. 4; sc. 5; sc. 6; sc. 10. PATROCLUS, a Grecian commander. Appears, Act II. sc. 1; sc. 3. Act III. sc. 3. Act IV. sc. 5. Act V. sc. 1.

THERSITES, a deformed and scurrilous
Grecian.

Appears, Act II. sc. 1; sc. 3. Act III. sc. 3.
Act V. sc. 1; sc. 4; sc. 8.

ALEXANDER, servant to Cressida.

Appears, Act I. sc. 2.

Servant to Troilus.

Appears, Act I. sc. 2. Act III. sc. 2.

Servant to Paris.

Appears, Act III. sc. 1.
Servant to Diomedes.

Appears, Act V. sc. 5.

HELEN, wife to Menelaus.

Appears, Act III. sc. 1.

ANDROMACHE, wife to Hector.

Appears, Act V. sc. 3.

CASSANDRA, daughter to Priam; a prophetess.
Appears, Act II. sc. 2. Act V. sc. 3.
CRESSIDA, daughter to Calchas.
Appears, Act I. sc. 2. Act III. sc. 2.
Act IV. sc. 2; sc. 4; sc. 5. Act V. sc. 2.

Trojan and Greek Soldiers, and Attendants.

SCENE, TROY, AND THE GRECIAN CAMP BEFORE it.

« ZurückWeiter »