speaks of the one-and-thirty years' space of Elizabeth's reign; and thus puts the date of the writing a year earlier than the printing. But we here look in vain for some other illustrious names besides that of Shakspere. Malone has not told us that the name of Edmund Spenser is not found in Puttenham; nor, what is still more uncandid, that not one of Shakspere's early dramatic contemporaries is mentioned neither Marlowe, nor Greene, nor Peele, nor Kyd, nor Lyly. The author evidently derives his knowledge of "poets and poesy" from a much earlier period than that in which he publishes. He does not mention Spenser by name, but he does "that other gentleman who wrote the late 'Shepherd's Calendar."" The Shepherd's Calendar' of Spenser was published in the year 1579. Malone goes on to argue that the omission of Shakspere's name, or any notice of his works, in Sir John Harrington's 'Apology of Poetry,' printed in 1591, in which "he takes occasion to speak of the theatre, and mentions some of the celebrated dramas of that time," is a proof that none of Shakspere's dramatic compositions had then appeared. The reader will be in a better position to judge of the value of this argument by a reference to the passage of Sir John Harrington:- "For tragedies, to omit other famous tragedies, that, that was played at St. John's in Cambridge, of Richard III., would move, I think, Phalaris the tyrant, and terrify all tyrannous-minded men." [This was a Latin play, by Dr. Legge, acted some years before 1588.] "Then for comedies. How full of harmless mirth is our Cambridge 'Pedantius' and the Oxford 'Bellum Grammaticale!'” [Latin plays again.] "Or, to speak of a London comedy, how much good matter, yea, and matter of state, is there in that comedy called The Play of the Cards,' in which it is showed how four parasitical knaves robbed the four principal vocations of the realm; videl. the vocation of soldiers, scholars, merchants, and husbandmen ! Of which comedy, I cannot forget the saying of a notable wise counsellor that is now dead, who, when some (to sing Placebo) advised that it should be forbidden, because it was somewhat too plain, and indeed as the old saying is (sooth boord is no boord), yet he would have it allowed, adding it was fit that they which do that they should not, should hear that they would not." Nothing, it will be seen, can be more exaggerated than Malone's statement, "He takes occasion to speak of the theatre, and mentions some of the celebrated dramas of that time." Does he mention Tamburlaine,' or 'Faustus,' or 'The Massacre of Paris,' or 'The Jew of Malta?' As he does not, it may be assumed with equal justice that none of these plays of Marlowe had appeared in 1591; and yet we know that he died in 1593. So of Lyly's 'Galathea,' 'AlexSo of Greene's ander and Campaspe,' 'Endymion,' &c. 'Orlando and Furioso,' 'Friar Bacon,' 'James IV.' So of the 'Spanish Tragedy' of Kyd. The truth is, that Harrington, in his notice of celebrated dramas, was even more antiquated than Puttenham; and his evidence, therefore, in this matter, is utterly worthless. But Malone has given his crowning proof that Shakspere had not written before 1591, in the following words :—“ Sir Philip Sydney, in his 'Defence of Poesie,' speaks at some length of the low state of dramatic literature at the time he composed this treatise, but has not the slightest allusion to Shakspere, whose plays, had they then appeared, would doubtless have rescued the English stage from the contempt which is thrown upon it by the accomplished writer; and to which it was justly exposed by the wretched compositions of those who preceded our poet. The Defence of Poesie' was not published till 1595, but must have been written some years before." There is one slight objection to this argument: Sir Philip Sydney was killed at the battle of Zutphen, in the year 1586; and it would really have been somewhat surprising if the illustrious author of the 'Defence of Poesy' could have included Shakspere in his account "of the low state of dramatic literature at the time he composed this treatise," which was in effect a reply to 'The School of Abuse' of Gosson, and to other controversialists of the puritanical faction, who were loudest about 1580. At that time Shakspere was sixteen years of age. CHAPTER IX. The would scarcely IN the spring of 1588, and through the summer also, we may well believe that Shakspere abided in London. course of public events was such that he have left the capital, even for a few weeks. For the hearts of all men in the vast city were mightily stirred; and whilst in that "shop of war" might be heard on every side the din of "anvils and hammers waking to fashion out the plates and instruments of armed justice," a the poet had his own work to do, in urging forward the noble impulse through which the people, of whatever sect, or whatever party, willed that they would be free. It was the year of the Armada. It had gone forth to all lands that England was to be invaded. Philip of Spain was preparing the greatest armament that the combined navies of Spain and Portugal, of Naples and Sicily, of Genoa and Venice, could bear across the seas, to crush the arch-heretic of England. Rome had blessed the enterprise. Prophecies had been heard, in divers languages, that the year 1588 "should be most fatal and ominous unto all estates," and it was 66 now plainly discovered that England was the main subject of that time's operation." Yet England did not quail. "The whole commonalty," says the annalist, "became of one heart and mind." The Council of War demanded five thousand men and fifteen ships of the City of London. Two days were craved for an answer; and the City replied that ten thousand men and thirty ships were at the service of their country. In every field around the capital were the citizens who had taken arms practising the usual points of war. The Camp at Tilbury was formed. "It was a pleasant sight to behold the soldiers, as they marched towards Tilbury, their cheerful countenances, courageous words and gestures, dancing and leaping wheresoever they came; and in the camp their most felicity was hope of fight with the enemy: where ofttimes divers rumours ran of their foes' approach, and that present battle would be given them; then were they joyful at such news, as if lusty giants a Milton: 'Speech for the Liberty of Unlicensed Printing.' Stowe's 'Arnals.' ་ were to run a race." There is another description of an All plum'd, like estridges that with the wind Wanton as youthful goats, wild as young bulls.” a He who wrote this description had, we think, looked upon the patriot trainbands of London in 1588. But, if we mistake not, he had given an impulse to the spirit which had called forth this "strong and mighty preparation," in a voice as trumpet-tongued as the proclamations of Elizabeth. The chronology of Shakspere's 'King John' is amongst the many doubtful points of his literary career. The authorship of the King John' in two Parts is equally doubtful. But if that be an older play than Shakspere's, and be not, as the Germans believe with some reason, written by Shakspere himself, the drama which we receive as his is a work peculiarly fitted for the year of the great Armada. The other play is full of matter that would have offended the votaries of the old religion. This, in a wise spirit of toleration, attacks no large classes of men-excites no prejudices against friars and nuns, but vindicates the independence of England against the interference of the papal authority, and earnestly exhorts her to be true to herself. This was the spirit in which even the undoubted adherents of the ancient forms of religion acted while England lay under the ban of Rome in 1588. The passages in Shakspere's 'King John' appear to us to have even a more pregnant meaning, when they are connected with that stirring time :— K. John. What earthly name to interrogatories Thou canst not, cardinal, devise a name So slight, unworthy, and ridiculous, To charge me to an answer, as the pope. Tell him this tale; and from the mouth of England Add thus much more,-that no Italian priest Shall tithe or toll in our dominions; But as we under Heaven are supreme head So under Him, that great supremacy, a 'Henry IV., Part I.,' Act iv., Scene 1. Where we do reign, we will alone uphold, K. Phil. Brother of England, you blaspheme in this. Dreading the curse that money may buy out; Against the pope, and count his friends my foes. K. John. The legate of the pope hath been with me And he hath promis'd to dismiss the powers Bast. O inglorious league! This England never did, nor never shall, But when it first did help to wound itself. Now these her princes are come home again, Come the three corners of the world in arms, And we shall shock them: Nought shall make us rue, The patriotism of Shakspere is less displayed in set speeches than in the whole life of historical plays—incident and character. Out of the inferior writers might be collected more laudatory sentences flattering to national pride; but his words are bright and momentary as the spark which fires the mine. The feeling is in the audience, and he causes it to burst out in shouts or tears. He learnt the management of this power, we think, during the excitement of the great year of 1588. The Armada is scattered. England's gallant sons have done their work; the winds, which a greater Power than that of sovereigns and councils holds in His hand, have been let loose. The praise is to Him. Now, a mighty procession is on the way to St. Paul's. The banners taken from the Spanish ships are hung out on the battlements of the cathedral; and now, surrounded by all the nobles and mighty men |