the one Friar Bacon's ambitious design fails through an external cause, the carelessness and stupidity of his assistant-at all events no explanation is given as to why the all-wise and all-powerful Bacon should confide such important services to such a fool; in the other, the sudden magnanimity of the Prince, his withdrawal in favour of Laey, and the latter's hesitation and trials are equally unaccounted for; both are events rather than actions. King Henry III. and the Emperor Frederick II., the King of Castile and his daughter, form (in the style of a popular ballad) a brilliant framework-the gold groundwork of the ancient pictures-they do not in the least enter into the action of the play, but rather accompany it with the grotesque and symbolical splendour of the Court manners and language of the day, and rather accept whatever the other characters determine and accomplish. Nevertheless the scenes run into one another smoothly and naturally; the action represented advances in a measured and graceful movement; most of the characters, and especially the comic ones-in their epic relief-like style of treatmentmay be called well executed, and the whole piece is pervaded by a breath of pure, fresh air, a bright, harmonious colouring, and a unity of the general tone which, it is true, cannot compensate for the missing centre of an internal causal connection, but surrounds the heterogeneous elements as by an invisible bond. In short, the piece possesses in an eminent degree all the merits of Greene's style.

Even if the already mentioned pleasant conceytet comedie of George-a-Greene, the Pinner of Wakefield' (London, 1599),* was not written by this author, still it is composed so completely in his style, and is so excellent of its kind that, for this reason alone, it deserves a short notice at our hands; and this all the more so as, in the notice upon one of the old prints, already referred to, R. Greene is called the author of the piece, and consequently, in addition to the internal reasons of its genuineness, we have this external confirmation as well. The subject in this case is again furnished by two popular legends which are connected with each other, and also with certain events *Dyce, pp. 249-268.

from the reign of the 'good king Edward' (probably the extremely popular Edward III.), without regard to chronological order or historical truth.

'George-a-Greene,' the faithful and chivalrous pinner,' and Robin Hood,' the mighty hunter, are still held in lively remembrance by Englishmen, and at the time when Greene wrote his piece they were favourite national heroes. These characters, therefore, have been conceived and treated by the poet in the very spirit of the legends and old ballads, which were then current. Extraordinary strength of body and an equal amount of courage and sense of honour, a lively cheerful temperament, loyalty to their king and attachment to their own class and their own mode of life, are the principal characteristics. Accordingly they are drawn in an epic style, merely from that side of their characters, by which they are connected with external relations, circumstances and events; their inward life of mind and soul is rarely if ever taken into consideration. In like manner the action is spun out from external causes, from accidental coincidences of circumstances and events. With the defeat of the rebellious Earl of Kendall by the Pinner, and of the Scottish king by old Musgrave, and their delivery as captives to the king, the thread of the first part of the story comes to an end. Then Robin Hood appears, and the action suddenly takes a new turn, the shoemakers of the merry town of Bradford playing the most prominent part; in short, we have the beginning of an entirely new piece in which, however, the story of the Pinner's love for the fair Bettris is incidentally brought to a close. It is manifest that the several parts of the action are no more closely connected with one another than, for instance, the exploits of Diomede with the anger of the godlike Achilles, or the adventurous travels of Ulysses with the manner in which he rid himself of his troublesome suitors. however, we for once allow this epical style to pass and overlook the faults against dramatic composition, the piece as a whole will be found so pleasing, the characters so unpretending and drawn with so few, yet clear and firm strokes, the language so natural and appropriate, the wit so sprightly and naïve, the whole pervaded by

If,

a tone of such homely cheerfulness, and the various elements held together by a spirit so in accordance with the old English popular life and character, that, in my opinion, it ranks higher even than Friar Bacon.'

Collier places the first appearance of Friar Bacon' in the year 1588: from Henslowe's Diary' it appears to have been acted in London in 1591.* The Pinner of Wakefield' may have been composed or rather put into its present shape somewhere about the same time, perhaps in 1589-90. For I think, it may pretty safely be assumed that Robert Greene originally wrote the piece in prose, and that he afterwards hastily and flightily changed it into blank verse. This seems to be so decidedly confirmed by the whole character of the diction, and more especially by the treatment of the blank verse-as compared with others of Greene's pieces-that I do not entertain the slightest doubt about the matter. Accordingly, the play in its first origin would be one of Greene's earliest works, and was very probably written about the year 1585.

* Dyce, p. 32.

CHAPTER XII.

CHRISTOPHER (KIT) MARLOWE.

MARLOWE'S oldest known piece, Tamburlaine the Great '— which Collier for very plausible, not to say safe reasons, places in the year 1586-was the first, as already repeatedly stated, that gave rise to the great linguistic reform in the English popular drama, that is, to the introduction of blank verse. The courage with which he, as quite a young poet (perhaps even on the occasion of his first dramatic attempt), ventured upon this undertaking, the cleverness and assurance with which he carried it out, the power and independence of his mind manifested in it, all throw some light upon his character. Marlowe, as Dyce has but recently ascertained, was the son of a shoemaker, and was born in Canterbury in 1564, probably towards the end of February (he was baptised, according to the Church register, on the 26th of February). He obtained free admission into the King's school at Canterbury, where he received his first education. Afterwards -probably by the help and assistance of a rich patron, whom he perhaps found in the person of Sir Roger Manwood-he went to Cambridge, studied at Benet College and was made B.A. in 1583, M.A. in 1587.† His wild, passionate nature seems however, at an early date, to have driven him from the career he had entered upon. It is probable that, soon after quitting the University, he became an actor-this at least is reported in one of the uncertain sources from which our knowledge in regard to his life is drawn-but appears soon afterwards to have left the stage possibly in order to live an entirely free and unrestrained life, and to be able to devote all his energies to literary work. At all *Collier, iii. 108 ff.

† A. Dyce, The Works of Christopher Marlowe, London, 1850, i. p. i. ff.

events we do not find his name mentioned among the members of any of the contemporary companies of players. On the other hand, several of his great tragedies appeared in quick succession: about 1588 The Life and Death of Dr. Faustus:' about 1589 his 'Jew of Malta;' in the following year, in any case, at least, no earlier than towards the end of 1589, The Massacre at Paris;' about the same time, his 'Dido, Queen of Carthage,'-a piece which he wrote in conjunction with Th. Nash, or which the latter perhaps finished'—and not long afterwards his Edward the Second,' which is probably his last work and in England is considered his best.*

These six dramas, in addition to some others which perhaps belong to him, or have been lost,† Marlowe composed in the course of six or seven years, during which he lived an unsteady and dissolute life, distracted by violent passions. In this respect he rivalled his associate Robert Greene, with this difference, however, that the latter's failings resulted from carelessness and weakness of character; with Marlowe, on the contrary, who possessed rather too much than too little strength of mind and will, it was the immoderation of his feelings and desires, his passionate susceptibility of temperament and a certain violence in his whole being, that were the cause of his ruinous irregularities. Like his life and character, so his death also was of a violent kind; according to unanimous reports, he died in the prime of life, on the first

* Dyce, l.c., i. pp. x., xiv., xx., xxii. f., xxviii. f.

+ Lust's Dominion, which was formerly attributed to Marlowe, is not his work, and was written later by Dekker, Haughton, and Day, as has already been pointed out by the Editor of Dodsley's Edition, ii. 311 f. Compare Collier, iii. 96, Dyce, i. p. lviii. f. The old Taming of a Shrew also, which some have recently wished to attribute to him, is certainly not written by him, as Dyce (l.c. p. lxv. f.) has clearly proved. On the other hand Dyce is of the opinion that the two historical dramas: The first part of the Contention between the two famous Houses of York and Lancaster, and The True Tragedie of Richard, Duke of York-upon which the second and third parts of Shakspeare's Henry VI. are founded-were, if not entirely, still for the most part, from his pen, and that he likewise had a hand in the old play of The Troublesome Raigne of King John (l.c., pp. lx. f. lxv.). In regard to this question I refer the reader to that portion of this work which will examine some of Shakspeare's dramas of doubtful origin.