66

66

being sufficiently famed for several specimens of wit, he betook himself to writing plays." None of these early famed specimens of wit are extant; nor is the precise period of his commencing dramatist ascertained. There is, indeed, a passage in the “Old Law,” a play in which he is supposed to have had a share, which might seem to carry back the date of his authorship to 1599, when he was only in his 15th year. The “Law,” on which the play turns, enacted that all men in the dominions of Epire, living to the age of fourscore, and women to the age of threescore, shall the same day be instantly put to death;" and the interest depends on the eagerness of bad sons to be rid of their fathers, bad wives of their aged husbands, and tired husbands of their old wives, contrasted with the earnest endeavours and pious stratagems of the good son Cleanthes to preserve his superannuated sire. Gnotho, the clown, naturally curious concerning the years of his Agatha, desires the clerk to consult the register, who reads as follows:-" Agatha, the daughter of Pollux, born 1540, and now 'tis 1599." Now I think there can be no doubt, that this was the actual year in which the play was first performed. There could be no other reason for so monstrous an anachronism. But though the plot is tragifarcical enough to have been invented by a boy of fifteen, it is utterly improbable that Massinger was concerned in it so early. If his name is correctly prefixed, it must have been for additions and alterations made at some subsequent period, according to the common practice of that age. Payments for additional scenes, reformations, &c. are common in the old theatrical accounts. Thus Ben Jonson received of Henslow forty shillings for writing his additions to Jeronymo, 25th September, 1601; and the 22d June, 1602, 107. "in earnest of a book called 'Richard Crookback,' and for new additions to Jeronymo." In the officebook of Sir Henry Herbert, Mr. Gifford found this item :- "Received for the adding a new scene to the Virgin Martyr,' this 7th July, 1624, 108." Shakspeare, doubtless, was often employed to make such reformations upon older plays, as we know was the case with the "Comedy of Errors," "Taming the Shrew," and the 2d and 3d parts of Henry VI." In the "Old Law" there are some scenes so vastly superior to the rest, that one could hardly wish them to be the work of the same brain. I would fain suppose them to be Massinger's; but Charles Lamb (who is but a cold admirer of our author) hath judged otherwise. "There is," says he, "an exquisiteness of moral sensibility, making one to gush out tears of delight, and a poetical strangeness in all the improbable circumstances of this wild play, which are unlike anything in the dramas which Massinger wrote alone. Middleton and Rowley, who assisted in this play, had both of them finer geniuses than their associate." Those who read Lamb's selections only (not that they are the only beauties) will probably agree with his decision. They will not improve their relish by reading the piece throughout. The characters of Eugenia, the would-be widow, and Lysander, her dotard husband, who attempts to give his years the lie by capering, drinking down a company of young springalds, &c. are pitiably disgusting. Mr. Lamb should have informed the readers of his specimens that the "Old Law" is all a trick of the Duke to try the temper of his young subjects, and that the old folks, supposed dead, are produced alive and well, in the 5th act. The play was not printed till 1656,

evidently by some distressed actor for a temporary supply. I am inclined to think that the name of Massinger was added to those of Middleton and Rowley without any authority.

For some years after his departure from Oxford, we hear nothing of Massinger at all. We cannot tell whether he went immediately to London, and applied to the theatres for employment, or tried and abandoned any other pursuit, or dwindled away some small patrimony in attendance on fortune and the great. But it is most likely, that repairing to the metropolis, an aimless adventurer, he fell in with some of the numerous players and play-writers with whom the town was swarming, some of whom might be old school or college associates, and between ambition and desperation, became a member of the fraternity. Play-writing was then the only species of literature, certainly the only species of poetry, by which ready money could be raised. Though not held in Athenian estimation, the drama was popular, fashionable, and highly patronised. King James was among its most distinguished protectors; at the very commencement of his reign he had licensed the company, heretofore called the Lord Chamberlain's, whereof Shakspeare, Burbage, Hemming, Condell, Armyn, &c., were members, to take upon themselves the title of "the King's Servants" (all actors, be it observed, were supposed to be servants either of the court or of the nobility). The Queen adopted the Earl of Worcester's players, and Prince Henry's name was bestowed on those of the Earl of Nottingham. Plays, as well as masques, were performed at court, and in great houses, on the principal festivals, weddings, and other days of high ceremony. Honourable gratuities had been given both to authors and actors. Many of the brightest of the time shone in both qualities. The stage was evoking and realizing the finest imaginations of the strongest intellects. It promised immediate profit, immediate applause, and a place among honoured names hereafter.

Massinger arrived in London at an exciting time. The visit of the King of Denmark to his august brother filled court and city with triumphs, masques, and revellings. No doubt the drama, decked out with a splendour alien to its usual habits, contributed to entertain the monarch stranger. It is said, that "Macbeth" was then first performed, and that King James wrote to Shakspeare a letter of compliment and commendation. I cannot tell what effect these incidents, if true, might have in determining Massinger's course; but dimmer omens of success have ofttimes given the casting-weight to inclination.

Massinger seems to have been of a shy, reserved, and somewhat melancholy nature. Nothing in his writings betokens the exuberant life and dancing blood of Shakspeare and Fletcher. This defect of animal spirits, perhaps, prevented him from following the example set by Peele, Marlow, Middleton, Rowley, Decker, Heywood, and Shakspeare himself, of uniting the functions of actor and author. This was probably a prudent course for prudent men. It secured a pittance not quite so precarious as the scanty remuneration of the dramatists. Instances were not rare of actors retiring in good circumstances. Dulwich college remains to testify the successful industry of Edward Alleyn, who, to his engagements of actor, author, and manager, added the important office of

"Master of the Bears and Dogs*." It is possible that Massinger had tried the stage and failed, as Ben Jonson had done before, and as Otway did afterwards; but we know nothing of his progress from 1606 till sometime between 1612 and 1614, when the melancholy document already alluded to, exhibits him as engaged with Field and Daborne in the construction of a drama-name unknown. It was discovered by Malone at Dulwich College, and seems to be without date; but Mr. Payne Collier judges it not later than 1614-eight years previous to the first edition of the “Virgin Martyr," the earliest published play bearing Massinger's name. It is as follows:

"To our most loving friend, Mr. Philip Hinchlow, esquire, These, "Mr. Hinchlow,

"You understand our unfortunate extremitie, and I doe not thincke you so void of cristianitie but that you would throw so much money into the Thames as wee request now of you, rather than endanger so many innocent lives. You know there is xl. more at least to be receaved of you for the play. We desire you to lend us vl. of that; which shall be allowed to you, without which we cannot be bayled, nor I play any more till this be dispatch'd. It will lose you xxl. ere the end of the next weeke, besides the hinderance of the next new play. Pray, sir, consider our cases with humanity, and now give us cause to acknowledge you our true freind in time of neede. Wee have

This office must needs have been accounted honourable; for in 1600 it was held by a knight, Sir James Darrington. It could hardly have been esteemed profane or immoral (except by the rigid puritans who condemned all exhibitions as heathenish vanities); for Alleyn is designated by it in the letters patent for the foundation of Dulwich College, 1620; a work of piety, to which tradition reports he was impelled by an apparition of Lucifer in propria persona on the stage, while he was acting that character, as indispensable in the moral plays as Harlequin (in some measure his successor, combining the qualities of Devil and Vice) in the modern pantomime. It could not be vulgar; for bear-baiting was among the princely pleasures of Kenilworth," provided for the entertainment of a Virgin Queen. Nor could the penny-wisest economist complain that it was over-paid; for the regular salary, exclusive of fees and perquisites, was but a farthing a day. As for the inhumanity of the business, that was little dreamed of; for in all the invectives and petitions launched against the sport by the city, and the pulpit, and the puritans, the torture of the animals is hardly alluded to. The only person who seemed to care for poor Bruin was his keeper. In Lysons's "Environs of London" is a curious complaint of Alleyn concerning the hard and unsportsmanlike usage which his shaggy charges had sustained, when lent out on some public occasion. There were Wyndhams in those days. Among the charges so perseveringly alleged against the theatres, one was that they seduced the people from bear-baiting and other manly recreations. Allusions to this amusement are so common in Shakspeare, that it is no breach of charity to suppose that he was an occasional visitor at "Military garden Paris.” Slender could commend his valour to sweet Ann Page by no stronger instance than this: "I have seen Sackerson loose twenty times, and taken him by the chain." Why, Othello could not brag more amorously. It would be as utterly unjust to suppose that our bear-baiting ancestors resembled the blackleg ruffians of the modern fancy, as that the Olympic victors celebrated by Pindar were like modern prize-fighters, pigeonshooters, and riders against time. Their amusement might be a rough relic of the hunter state, but it was not mercenary, base, and fraudulent. The vile spirit of gambling, which produces more cruelty than antique rudeness shall ever have to answer for, has degraded all the athletic exercises of England.

Butler is the Pindar of the bear-wards. There is more humour, as distinguished from wit, and more graphic power in his "Bear-Bait," than in any other part of Hudibras.

Some curious particulars concerning this ancient sport may be found in Hone's "Table-Book ;" an amusing repository of antiquities, and modern oddities that will be antiquities in the twentieth century.

entreated Mr. Davison to deliver this note, as well to witness your love as our promises, and alwayes acknowledgement to be ever,

"Your most thanckfull and loving friend,

"NAT. FIELD."

"The money shall be abated out of the money remayns for the play of Mr. Fletcher and ours. ROB. DABORNE."

"I have ever found you a true loving friend to mee, and in soe small a suite, it beeinge honest, I hope you will not fail us. PHILIP MASSINGER."

Indorsed: "Received by mee Robert Davison of Mr. Hinchlow for the use of Mr. Daboerne, Mr. Feeld, Mr. Messenger, the sum of vl. ROB. DAVISON."

This tripartite supplication requires a few remarks and commentaries. Philip Hinchlow, or Henslowe, whose account-book has thrown so much dubious light on our early theatrical history, though extensively engaged in theatrical speculation, was no regular scion of the play-house, but "seems originally to have been a sort of pawnbroker who advanced money upon various kinds of property, but especially wearing apparel. The players often pledged their dresses with him, and afterwards hired them when they were wanted; this probably was the commencement of Henslowe's connexion with plays and theatres. Various companies, in this manner, might become his debtors, and he ultimately possessed a large share of the wardrobe and properties of the play-houses in which he was concerned. In 1591 he either extensively repaired or built the Rose on the Bankside, and, on the 8th of February in that year, he began to register his receipts *." A comfortable kind of person for three poets to be obliged to, when, it is to be feared, they had nothing but the forestalled labour of their brains to pledge; and were, too probably, in the catchpole's custody, if not actually in Limbo! Whether Christianity, or the loss of the 201. suggested by Field, had most effect in moving the old pawnbroker's bowels, I leave to the reader's charitable judgment. The name of Nathaniel Field, who was Massinger's partner in the "Fatal Dowry," and author of two comedies-"Woman's a Weathercock," from which Lamb has given extracts, printed 1612; and "Amends for Fair Ladies," 1618; but both written and acted before 1611-appears in the list of sharers in the Globe and Blackfriars, along with Burbage, (the original Richard III., Hamlet, and Othello,) Lowin, (the original Falstaff,) and others of histrionic note, in a patent under the great seal,

History of Dramatic Poetry, vol. iii. 85. By several passages in the same work, we find that Henslowe's extortion was a frequent subject of complaint with the players. But players are apt to be exorbitant as well as pawnbrokers. There is no coming at the rights of the matter now. Philip was far from a learned clerk ; not that his orthography, or rather heterography, is any decisive test of his attainments; for men of classical education at that time spelt as strangely as any love-sick cook,maid, ere the schoolmaster was abroad. His diary, we are told, has been wickedly mutilated by thievish autograph hunters, who think themselves richer by filching an author's good or ugly name. It supplies a great deal of information respecting the payment of authors and actors, and the properties of the play-houses; which though in some respects far less various and appropriate than those exhibited in Hogarth's Barn, were exclaimed against by many, as tending by their mimic gorgeousness to bring the splendour of the crown itself into contempt.

dated the 27th March 1619-20. He performed as one of the "Children of the Queen's Chapel" in Jonson's "Cynthia's Revels," 1600-in his "Poetaster,” 1601— and as a child of "the Queen's Revels" in "Epicone," 1609-in which latter year he is mentioned with Shakspeare, Daborne, and Kirkham in a curious document brought to light by the indefatigable Collier, and given in his "New Facts." It authorises "the said Robert Daborne, William Shakspeare, Nath. Field, and Edward Kirkham, from time to time, to provide and bring upp a convenient nomber of children, and them to instruct and exercise in the quality of playing tragedies, comedies, &c., by the name of Children of the Revells to the Queene, within the Black fryers in our citie of London, or elsewhere within our realme of England." It would seem that Shakspeare soon drew out of the concern. He had formerly spoken with something like ridicule of these juvenile actors, who were thus enlisted, or rather impressed, into the service of Melpomene and Thalia, though with his usual discretion he muzzles the point of his censure, by intrusting it to that very civil, simple, goodsort of a gentleman, Rosencrantz :-" But there is, sir, an aviary of children, little eyases, that cry out on the top of question, and are most tyrannically clapp'd for't. These are now the fashion, and so berattle the common stages (so they call them) that many wearing rapiers are afraid of goose quills, and scarce dare come thither." But Hamlet's question in reply, is hardly fair. "What! are they children? Who maintains them? Will they pursue the quality no longer than they can sing?" Now, as to their maintenance, the children of the Queen's Chapel and the children of Paul's were probably better secured in that respect than their elders of the quality; and good provision was made for them when they could no longer sing. As early as the reign of Edward IV. it was appointed " Also when they" (the children of the Chapel) “be growen to the age of eighteen yeres, and then theire voyces be chaunged, and they cannot be preferred in this chappell, nor within this court, the number being full, then yf they will absent, the king signeth onely such child to a colledge of Oxford or Cambridge of the king's foundation, there to be in findeing and study sufficiently till the king otherwise list to advance him." And James I., in the first year of his reign, ordained that "after serving three years, if they lose their voices they shall be sent to college to be taught at the king's charge." Yet many good people, who are scandalized at the Latin plays of Westminster, will be surprised that in the pious days of England; in the glorious morning of the Reformation; in "great Eliza's golden time;" under Kings and Queens, that were the nursing-fathers and nursing-mothers of the Church-the public acting of plays should be, not the permitted recreation, but the compulsory employment of children devoted to sing the praises of God,—of plays, too, the best of which children may now only read in a "family" edition,—of some, whose very titles a modern father would scruple to pronounce before a woman or a child*.

Among the plays claimed by William Beeston, as "Master of the King and Queen's young company of players, at the Cockpit in Drury-lane," were Ford's ""Tis Pity She's a Whore;" his only less offensive "Love's Sacrifice," and "A Fool and her Maidenhead soon parted;" a play of which I never heard elsewhere. This was in 1639. Three years afterwards the theatres were closed by authority of Parliament.

d