The life and times of George Villiers, duke of Buckingham, Volume 3 (of 3): From original and authentic sourcesThomson, A. T., Mrs.
History
The life and times of George Villiers, duke of Buckingham, Volume 3 (of 3): From original and authentic sources
Thomson, A. T., Mrs.
Buckingham, George Villiers, Duke of, 1592-1628
Jonson’s acquaintance with Shakspeare is stated by Rowe to have
begun with “a remarkable piece of humanity and good-nature on the
part of the immortal bard.” Jonson, who was then, as Rowe observes,
“entirely unknown to the world,” had offered “Every Man in his
Humour” for representation; it was carelessly looked over, and
returned in a supercilious manner by the person who had read it,
with the uncourteous answer “that it would be of no use to the
company.” Happily, however, Shakspeare chanced to cast his eyes on
the manuscript, and found in the play something that powerfully
engaged his attention. Generous, as well as gifted, he recommended
both Jonson and his drama to the attention of the actors, and to
that of the public also.[205]
Footnote 205:
Rowe’s “Life of Shakspeare,” p. xxxiii.
The old play, with the Italian names, the scene laid at Florence,
had been first brought out at the Rose Theatre; and it was,
apparently, the amended drama, which, from the numerous alterations,
had become again Jonson’s property, according to the custom of the
time, that attracted the notice of Shakspeare.[206] Be that as it
may, “Every Man in his Humour” was acted at Blackfriars in 1598, and
Shakspeare’s name appears at the head of it as one of the
performers. This was about sixteen years before the Bard of Avon
sought for repose on the banks of his beloved river, and in his
native town.
Footnote 206:
Gifford, p. 2.
Henceforth the literary world was divided by the factions which
penetrate even into the studies of the lettered; and a sort of
rivalship was set up, in which, it appears, the partisans of the two
great dramatists were far more rife than the parties concerned.
The contending critics endeavoured to exalt the one at the expense
of the other. Pope observes, “It is ever the nature of parties to be
in extremes; and nothing is so probable as that, because Ben Jonson
had much the more learning, it was said on the one hand that
Shakspeare had none at all; and because Shakspeare had much the most
wit and fancy, it was retorted on the other that Jonson wanted both;
because Shakspeare borrowed nothing, it was said that Ben Jonson
borrowed everything; because Jonson did not write extempore, he was
reproached with being a year about every piece; and because
Shakspeare wrote with ease and facility, they cry’d he never once
made a blot.”[207]
Footnote 207:
Pope’s “Essay on Shakespere,” prefixed to the Oxford edition, p.
xix., 1745.
Yet, without attempting to enter into a controversy long since
passed away, and doubtful in origin and extent, it is satisfactory
to find Jonson’s vindication from unworthy motives in his famous
lines, “To the Memory of my Beloved, the Author, Mr. William
Shakespere, and what he hath left us:” in which he truly calls him
the “Soul of the Age.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account