ftHs^moNiB jL 642365 
 50401 afluence 
 
 on the dramatical literature of England. 
 
 An Essay 
 
 UC-NRLF 
 
 >sed as an 
 
 B 2 bM2 TbS 
 
 mmm^mrm 0)ISS©trtatiJ@tit) 
 
 by reason, of which. 
 
 after liaving in due form passed the prescribed examina- 
 tion before the most honourable philosophical faculty 
 of the University ofJRostock 
 
 lite (le/jree of a Dodo?' of Philosophy 
 
 has been conferred 
 
 upon 
 
 Otto R,iecleL 
 
 c^Q^StSH- 
 
 V 
 
 CROSSE N. 
 Printed by F e r d. R i e p 
 
 186 8 
 
To 
 
 Professor Dr. L Ikrrijj 
 
 flie generous man; the distinguislicd scholar 
 
This Essay 
 
 as a slight token of sincere veneration and gratitude 
 
 is inscribed 
 
 by his humble servant 
 
 The Author. 
 
Dryden's influence on the dramatical 
 literature of England. 
 
 diligent observer of the history of maukiud will ne- 
 ver fail to trace in it the onward march of progress, migh- 
 tily pressing forward at times, often imperceptibly, yet ever 
 without interruption. History however is not a bare rela- 
 tion of the fate that has befallen empires and cities, nor a 
 nomenclature of battles and dates, or a panegyric of men 
 renowned for their valour in the field or their cunning in 
 the cabinet, for all these are but accidentalities attending 
 the advance of the human race by civilization to liberty 
 and prosperity. A true history of the human race ought 
 to take account of every influence that has been exercised 
 upon it by every circumstance and every event afl'ecting it 
 
4 
 
 and (hose parallel or diverging ought to be weighed in jud- 
 ging rightly of the state of civilization generally or of (hat 
 of a certain nation at a given time. For unless such is 
 done it will never be possible to account satisfactorily for 
 (he strange changes that sciences arts and industry have 
 undergone in the course of time, which have frequently 
 risen to high excellence at one period and have suddenly 
 decayed in that succeeding. If the literature of a nation 
 at a stated period be the expression of the aspirations 
 and tastes of the educated and well-bred, the remark will 
 generally hold good, that it has gathered its greatest 
 triumphs during times of conmiotion internal or exter- 
 nal, during times of great national activity or violent strug- 
 gles for change of present circumstances, when there is a 
 general upheaving of old ideas and the hearts of men are 
 quickened with the hope of securing a purer and higlier 
 condition of humanity. Conversely, then, literature may be 
 considered to languish when a nation is reposing in ex- 
 haustion, when there is a small show of public activily and 
 new vigour is to be gained after times of trouble and an- 
 xious disquiet. Such times generally can show Utile that 
 is original, rules and precepts then hold unlimited sway, 
 every thing is done with caution and care and literature not 
 unfrequeutiy turns to foreign models, not being suflicienlly 
 confident in its excellence when following the promplings of 
 (he national bias. 
 
 This decay of poelry and the consequent imitation of 
 foreign models was, however, not wholly owing to causes 
 derived from the passive state of repose in which (he Eng- 
 lisli nation indulijed after the restoralion and the general 
 
iii'iiiTcreiice to the prosecution of any elevated aims; its pri- 
 mary souixe must be traced to tl>e progress of* the world's 
 history. The middle ages were at their close, their spirit had 
 vanished with their institutions and the Ih'st influence of the 
 gradual advance towards a new development of society, how- 
 ever beneficial it might prove in later times, was blighting 
 to the flight of fancy and the production of tender and 
 imaginative poetij. 
 
 All Europe then, following the example of Italy, turned 
 to the study of (he Romans and subsequently to that of the 
 French who had been the most successful in bringing 
 about the renaissance of letters; England followed the ge- 
 neral impulse. The reluctant manner in which it did so is 
 well compared by Pope in his essay oji criticism with the 
 opposition made by the English to the early Roman invaders. 
 Thu.s, he says, Ave remained unpolished, there were few only 
 who had the courage to advocate the cause of the ancients 
 and to lay down the fundamental laws of wit. 
 
 Into such a state of literary languour England had fall- 
 en at the restoration after having passed through a period 
 as illustrious in literary merit as any that has graced the 
 history of a natioi}. Shakspere, Jonson, Beaumont and Flet- 
 cher were dead, the first all but forgotten, Milton alone 
 rose in solitary grandeur in this time of literary inanity, 
 but he can scarcely be said to belong to that age, although 
 his „Paradise Lost" was published in it (1667), for he li- 
 ved in a world to himself as it were, forgotten and him- 
 self trying to forget a state of things that had been raised 
 on the ruins of the fond aspirations of his youth and man- 
 liood and unable then to exercise any influence upon it. 
 
6 
 
 That was the time that witnessed the triumphs of Joliii 
 Dryden, a man g'fted with high intellectual powers, a clear 
 perception and correct judgment which he was willing to 
 employ whenever his o^^il interest or the fear of offending 
 the prevailing taste of the higher circles of society did not 
 oppose, versatile in the exireme, and, though he was well 
 ahle to instruct, he was entirely wanting In those gentler 
 faculties of the mind hy which it is the poet's lofiy privi- 
 lege to touch an<! to delight. Leaving aside his meiKs tn 
 l)ric and epic poetry and in satire, which w^as ideed that 
 species of literature to which his genius most inclined and 
 in which he has heen most successful, it is certain, that 
 (he reputation he gained as a dramatist was wholly owing 
 lo the time into which his lot had heen cast. For not only 
 liave all his plays heen entirely forgotten and are mention- 
 ed now only as links in the chain of the literary produc- 
 tions of the English poets, hut (he representation of any 
 of his plays would not now he suffered hy any refined au- 
 dience. Johnson says very meaningly, that in writing the 
 biography of Dry den he wished, he might he spared any 
 mention of his dramatical works, yet Dryden was during 
 the greater part of his life employed in the composition 
 of them and to them he owes the fame and (he prefer- 
 ment he enjoyed in his own time. He was, hov.ever, well 
 aware himself, that his genius was in no way lilted for (he 
 drama and yet he wrote plays for the simple reason, as 
 he nmkes a point of openly declaring, of enjoying (he great- 
 er monetary advantages they produced. So depraved, how- 
 ever, was the taste of (he people at that time, (hat they 
 could be pleased wi(h productions indulging in su|)iiie extra- 
 
i 
 
 vagances and devoid of ail the iniluences lliat could (ouch 
 Ihe softer chords of the human heart. 
 
 Yet Dryden's influence on English dramatical literature 
 has doubtlessly been very great. This, however, is not so 
 much owing to the examples he set in the composition of 
 his dramas, as to a series of criticisms on the dramatical art 
 which, although they contain little that is original, and 
 though, in spite of the purity of the language he employs 
 and the ease and elegance of diction, they are frequently 
 rather tedious on account of many superfluous repetitions, 
 yet have the great merit of being the first of that species 
 of criticism in a country, where, before Dryden, it was ut- 
 terly unknown. It appears, however, that he was himself 
 uncertain what rules to follow and what taste to prescribe 
 in the tragic art, for we see him wavering to and fro, now 
 inclining to the solemn and stately gravity of the French tra- 
 gedy, now advocating the intermixture of the pathetic with 
 the vulgar or burlesque, that had till then been usually 
 found on the English stage. Nevertheless he may be re- 
 garded as the founder of the French style in tragedy, as 
 he was undoubtedly in lyric and epic poesy, a style that 
 found its most ardent admirers in Pope and Young and con- 
 tinued to be generally recognized as artistic and correct 
 up to the time when Goldsmith and his contemporaries freed 
 English literature from its trammels. It may, however, be 
 doubted if Dryden adhered to it through a conviction of its 
 excellence and it seems reasonable to suppose from the 
 bent of his character, that he did so chiefly for two very 
 weighty reasons, the first being that the taste of the king 
 whose patronage Dryden was most anxious to obtain, incli- 
 
8 
 
 tied that way, (he second, that he was inucli better fitted 
 lo excel in a form of tragedy in which correct delineation 
 of character, facility of dialogue and the pomp of versifi- 
 cation might compensate for warmth of feeling and eleva- 
 tion of sentiment. 
 
 In order fully to understand Dryden's position as a dra- 
 matical writer, it is necessary to give a concise sketch of 
 the state of the English stage during the time immediately 
 preceding (hat in which he wrote. 
 
 During (he political struggle that took place in (he reign 
 of Charles I. the dramatic muse had lain dormant in Eng- 
 land. The Puritans who had at last gained the ascendancy, 
 held every production of the fine arts in utter abominadon, 
 their animosity was, however, principally directed against 
 theatrical representations of whatever kind they might he. 
 At that (ime not only had the theatres been closed, hut 
 any leaning to such diversions and occupations as the Puri- 
 (ans had proscribed, never failed to be construed into po- 
 litical opposition and was rudely suppressed. When, there- 
 fore, Charles 11. was restored to the throne, the nation 
 at large had almost forgotten that they had once delighted 
 in theatrical representations. The king, however, was na- 
 turally anxious to blot out everything that could remind the 
 people of the rule of the party lately in power, he was, 
 moreover, particularly fond of theatrical amusements which 
 had formed his principal pastime when in exile. The resti- 
 tution of the theatres to their former importance and their 
 endowment with new splendour was therefore as much a 
 matter of prudence as of predilection, for not only was a 
 well appointed stage at the royal court supposed to sur- 
 
round it with a peculiar splendour but also it would be in- 
 strumental in thoroughly persuading the public at large Ihat 
 the rule of the Puritans and their forced austerity were 
 now at an end. The theatres were therefore reopened under 
 royal patronage and were soon more crowded than ever. 
 All attractions that could possibly be brought to bear were 
 put forward, the splendour of scenery, dresses and decora- 
 tion heightened the effect of the representations, it was then 
 also for the first time in public theatres that women took 
 part in the performance, a custom that had till then been 
 restricted to the court and to the castles of the nobility. 
 Charles IL on his accession to the throne, then, was eager 
 to grant full privileges for theatrical representation to two 
 companies of players, the one of which, enjoying the patro- 
 nage of the Duke of York under the direction of Sir W. Dave- 
 nant was called the Duke's company, the other directed by 
 Thomas Killegrew who were to act at the King's theatre 
 adopted the name of the King's servants. A splendid op- 
 portunity was therefore offered to dramatic poets for the exer- 
 cise of their talents, moreover the drama thenceforward and 
 for almost a century from that time was that department of 
 literature in which the poet's exertions were more amply 
 rewarded than in any other. 
 
 Dryden was one of the great number of those, who, 
 as the small amount of paternal fortune obliged liim to in- 
 crease his income by some means or other, resolved to 
 devote his time and his powers chiefly to the drama, as 
 being the most lucrative employment that his genius would 
 admit, „though,'- he says of himself, „it never inclined me 
 much to writino; for the stage.'' Having once entered upon 
 
10 
 
 the career of a dramatic writer, lie kept possession of 
 the stage for many years, not that he was without rivals 
 and was often severely criticised, but he succeeded in esta- 
 blishing his reputation to such a degree, that he was con- 
 sidered an authority in dramatical matters, and was always 
 sure of an attentive hearing, however the public might fi- 
 nally decide. 
 
 As the king and his licentious retainers who had for- 
 med their tastes in Spain and France favoured the introduc- 
 tion of the French style of dramatic composition and this 
 was in direct opposition to that previously prevalent in Eng- 
 land, as, moreover, the mercenary dramatists of the time 
 were obliged to please not only the court but also the peo- 
 ple at large, it became incumbent upon them to try a con- 
 ciliation of two tendencies of taste so utterly at variance 
 with each other. This was certainly the aim that Dryden 
 proposed to himself, but as he was dependent upon court 
 favour, it is with the utmost caution, at times exceedingly 
 ludicrous, that he now and then advances what Ave may 
 suppose to be his real opinion of the writers who had till 
 then reigned supreme on the English stage. He is con- 
 tinually pandering to the taste of the courtiers as a body 
 or to the individual opinion of noblemen whose patronage 
 he wished to obtain, and so frequently does he contradict 
 himself, that it is exceedingly difficult to guess what his 
 opinions really were. It seems highly probable, that, had 
 his position in life been such, that he had not been obliged 
 to rely for support upon his pen, he would have been a 
 strenuous advocate of the readmission to the stage of the 
 dramatists belonging to the age preceding his, for if we 
 
11 
 
 carefijfty peruse his criticisms of them, we may easily dis- 
 cover, that, whenever he deprecates their language, their 
 style or their plots, he does so with a self-complacent re- 
 flexion upon the refined state of society or the excellence 
 of the drama of his time, upon his own dramatic powers 
 or the elegance of his own language. Thus it is, that, as 
 he failed to bring about the mediation above alluded to, 
 yet would not oppose his opinions to the taste prevailing 
 at the court, he made a compromise with himself, and, well 
 knowing where success was to be found, he sided with 
 the ruling party and advocated the introduction of the 
 French style of tragedy. 
 
 Dryden's most important rival at the commencement of 
 his dramatical career was Sir William Davenant who was 
 well contented with following the model of the French 
 drama. The first tragedy that was acted after the restora- 
 tion was a novel kind of play by that author, to which he 
 gave the name of „Heroic Opera" and which bore the title : 
 ,,The siege of Rhodes made a representation by the art of 
 prospective in scenes; and the story sung in recitative mu- 
 sick." It pleased, and Edw. Howard, ' Robert Howard and 
 William Stapleton imitated it, so that in a short time it be- 
 came the favourite form of play. In the year 1670 Dryden 
 published, as an apology for the extravagances he had since 
 himself introduced, an „Essay on Heroic Plays" in which 
 he blames the lameness of the action, the simplicity - of de- 
 sign and the want of variety of characters. A heroic play, 
 he says, ought to be an imitation of a heroic epos and, 
 consequently, love and valour ought to be the theme of it. 
 But he is by no means satisfied with that. He also de- 
 
12 
 
 maiiils many apparitions oi' gods and spirits, noise oI'iDattio 
 etc. for by tliis, he says, the tragedian distinguishes him- 
 self from the historian who only tells dry facts. Yet here, 
 though he professes boldly to cut out a new road, his 
 usual caution again overcomes him, so that, in order ta 
 conciliate those that might be opposed to his views, he ex- 
 cuses himself with the example of Shakspere and Jonson, 
 who, he says, had frequently used all the means that he 
 recommends, to heighten te effect of the representation, such 
 as the use of trumpets, drimis and shows of battle. 
 
 It is not known with certainty at what date Dryden's 
 first play was acted, it appears, how^ever, probable, that he 
 commenced writing for the stage in the year 1663, the 
 thirty second of his age. His first play was a comedy called the 
 „WiId Gallant". His performance met with very ill success 
 and for some time blighted his prospects. Nothing daun- 
 ted, however, and driven by necessity, he published in the 
 year following „the Rival Ladies" which he dedicated to 
 the earl of Orrery, a man equally distinguished as a writer 
 and as a statesman. This play was written in rhyme, which 
 Dryden defends in the dedication by arguments which he 
 repeats almost verbatim in all his later essays on the drama. 
 He attributes to rhyme a particular grace in repartees and 
 says, that „the sudden smartness of the answer and the 
 sweetness of the rhyme set off the beauty of each other." 
 The greatest advantage of it, however, he considers to con- 
 sist in its bounding and circumscribing the fancy, for, he 
 says, the imagination of the poet nnist be restrained, and 
 blank verse, being more easy of composition, tempts the 
 poet to say many things that might better be omitted en- 
 
13 
 
 tirely or said in fewer words. Here tlieu Drydeii openly 
 declares himself an advocate of the French style, but he 
 we 1 knew, that he was addressing a man who would be 
 glad to hear any arguments that might prove the propriety 
 of the style of dramatical composition he himself followed. 
 
 The earl of Orrery had been the first to introduce rhyme 
 in tragedies not long after the restoration and Dryden pro- 
 bably thought, that he could best make the public forget 
 the failure of the „Wild G'allant" and secure success for the 
 future by adopting the style of that nobleman and, thereby, 
 at the same time flattering the taste of the king. His de- 
 fence of rhyme, how^ever, in the preface to the „Rival La- 
 dies" engaged him in a dispute with Sir Robert Howard 
 whose sister was Dryden's wife, and in connexion with whom 
 he had written his third tragedy entitled: „The Indian 
 Queen" published in 1666. Sir Robert Howard in the pre- 
 face to a collection of his plays had ^ensured Dryden's 
 opinions. Dryden therefore vindicated himself in his „Es- 
 say on dramatic poetry" which was written in the form of 
 a conversation between four friends, Eugenius, Crites, Lisi- 
 dejus aud Neander who are supposed to have met and to 
 row down the Thames on the eve of the naval engage- 
 ment near Lowestoft in the year 1665, in order to listen 
 to the sound of the firing, and who on their return, from con- 
 jecturing on the many panegyrics that would in all proba- 
 bility be written on the victorious admiral, are led to con- 
 sider the respective merits of English and French tragedy. 
 It is nor known with certainty who the persons hid under 
 the feigned luimes of Eugenius and Lisidejus were, but it 
 is most probable, that Crites was meant to represent Sir 
 
14 
 
 Robert Howard and Ncander plainly is Dryden himself. 
 Though this essay was obviously intended to answer the 
 exceptions Sir Robert Howard had taken at the opinions 
 expressed in Dryden's preface to „the Rival Ladies" still, 
 anxious not to offend either party, Dryden distinctly says in 
 an „address to the reader" prefixed to it, that he had 
 „chiefly written it to vindicate the honour of English wri- 
 ters from the censure of those who unjustly prefer the 
 French before them", and with his wonted caution adds, 
 that that essay was written in the country without the help 
 of books or the advice of friends, so that, on that consi- 
 deration, any shortcomings of his might be excused. This 
 essay, however, is certainly the finest work that flowed 
 from Dryden's pen. At the time it w^as written, Dryden was 
 still a timorous candidate for fame and this essay, there- 
 fore, bears the stamp of diligence and care, both of which, 
 unhappily, he frequently remitted when his reputation was 
 firmly established. The account he gives of the English dra- 
 matists is exceedingly striking, his criticism of Shakspere 
 especially is delightful in conception and most elegant in 
 execution, and may be regarded as a model of critical con- 
 cision, for, in a few words he so fully exhibits a character 
 so vast in its comprehension and so wonderful in its indi- 
 viduality, that he seems to have bestowed upon him all 
 the praise, and drawn up all the comment that forms the 
 gist of the many volumes composed to do honour to his 
 memory. 
 
 Sir Robert Howard, however, not satisfied with that li- 
 beral exposition of the question, renewed the attack against 
 Dryden in the preface to a play, called „the Duke of Lerma" 
 
15 
 
 which he pubUshed in the year 1667, and which, though 
 written in a very confused style and with a small show of 
 genius or striking argument, purposed ridiculing Dryden's 
 defence of rhyme in tragedies. Though it appears, that 
 amity had till then existed between these two men, still 
 Dryden, being the attacked party, and obliged by necessity, 
 to save his reputation, probably also offended at Sir Robert 
 Howard's off-hand and authoritative style, wrote a very ve- 
 hement defence of his opinions, which he prefixed to the 
 second edition of his „Indian Emperor" published in the 
 same year as the „Duke of Lerma." His defence was na- 
 turally restricted to upholding the different points of opi- 
 nion advanced in the first essay, on which Sir Robert How 
 ard had founded his attack. The manner in which Dryden 
 acquitted himself of this task is in my opinion one of the 
 most eminent proofs of the pungency of his wit and the 
 sharpness of his satire, and doubt whether there are many 
 instances in the history of the war of pamphlets, where an 
 opponent certainly not contemptible has been so thoroughly 
 overcome with his ow^n weapons. This defence was how- 
 ever, probably as a favour shown* to Sir Robert Howard, on 
 that writer's own request, omitted in the following editions 
 of the „Indian Emperor" and even in the second it is not 
 added to all the copies. 
 
 Dryden's next piece was a tragi-comedy entitled: „Se- 
 cret love or the Maiden Queen". In the preface to it he 
 tells the public, that it is regular according to the strict- 
 est of dramatic laws, and recommends it upon this asser- 
 tion, which, in his opinion, he himself is qualified" to make. 
 AVilh regard to the ornament of writing and to those parts 
 
JG 
 
 Mlicrc fancy predominates, he says, tlie poet is frequently 
 prevented by self-love to see his faults. Notwithstanding 
 his own recommendation, hoAvever, he seems not to have 
 been w^ell assured himself of the value of this piece, for 
 he qualifies it in saying, that he fears, people who 
 have seen it performed will he disappointed in reading it, 
 the scenery and the excellence of representation havhig 
 greatly enhanced the impression he supposes it to have 
 made. 
 
 Then followed in quick succession „Sir Martin Mar -all", 
 a comedy, „the Tempest", an alteration of Shakspere's play, 
 „an Evenings Love" or „the Mock Astrologer", a comedy, 
 „Tyrannic Love" orjtlie „Virgin martyr", a tragedy, and 
 „the Conquest of Granada". All of these plays, including 
 the „hidian Queen" and the „lndian Emperor" were produced 
 between the year 1668, when, on Sir William Davenant's 
 death, Dryden obtained the Laureateship, and the year 1671, 
 the period that may be considered as that of his greatest 
 productiveness, and when, as most of these plays were fa- 
 vourably received at the court, Dryden was at the height 
 of his fame and had the undisputed controll of the stage. 
 The French style in the composition of plays according to 
 the rules of Corneille as well with regard to the structure 
 of the plots as to the employment of verse then thoroughly 
 prevailed by Dryden's efforts and authority, and he must 
 have thought his victory complete, when a sudden blow 
 came to overthrow all his endeavours. This was the re- 
 presentation of a farce called „the Rehearsal", wTitten by the 
 Duke of ^Buckingham in conjunction with some other ad- 
 versaries of (he style Dryden had introduced for the pur- 
 
17 
 
 pose of holding up to ridicule the poet and his productions. 
 It imitated with the greatest felicity all the rant and bom- 
 bast employed in his heroic pieces, introducing gorgeous 
 processions and apparitions, noise of battle etc. and exhi- 
 biting all the extravagances of the action in Dryden's plays, 
 which had attained their acme in the „Conquest of Gra- 
 nada". The poet himself, moreover, was introduced under 
 the name of Bayes and his manners and usual modes of 
 expression mimicked with signal success. Dryden must have 
 been thoroughly ignorant of the progress of that satire, 
 else he would with his usual ease In recanting and chan- 
 ging his opinion to the public, have blunted its sting by 
 some sudden literary repentance, but, on the contrary, he 
 precipitated the doom that hung over him by the represen- 
 tation of the „Conquest of Granada", that play in which he 
 seems to have been determined to glut the public with 
 dramatic wonders. All that can be incredible in love and 
 impossible in valour, all that can be extravagant in concep- 
 tion and unlikely in action he has here brought together 
 and tried to heighten the effect by the most gorgeous ap- 
 parel of the stage. It is highly probable, that this extra- 
 vagance would have produced a reaction in the public taste, 
 even if a determining motive had not come to its aid, for 
 we are told byGildon, that: „the success of that play was 
 not owing to the excellency of the poet's performance but 
 to the extravagance"; for he „had always observed it to 
 have the effect of comedy on the audience." So much the 
 more the blow inflicted upon Dryden by the „Rehearsal" 
 must have been fatal and it is certain, that he never re- 
 covered from it. 
 
18 
 
 There is however evidence to show, Ihat the ,,Rehear- 
 sal*' was not originally intended against Dryden, it seems 
 to have originated with the introduction of the heroic Opera 
 of Sir Will Davenant, for there are some traits in it, that 
 refer specially to that poet. It may also have been directed 
 against Sir Robert Howard with the collateral object of pas- 
 sing off some severe ridicule upon other prominent charac- 
 ters of that time, for it contains passages that unmistakea- 
 bly warrant that conclusion. The design then seems to 
 have been to ridicule the reigning dramatist of the time 
 and the prevailing taste for the French style of composi- 
 tion, and the idea of bringing it forward had probably b,een 
 set aside for some time, when the representation of the 
 ,,Conquest of Granada" revived it. Dr. Johnson is of opi- 
 nion, that the satire could not possibly have been intended 
 to ridicule that play, as he says, it was not published till 
 1678, but it appears, that he has mistaken the date, and 
 that it was first represented in 1671; besides the effect of 
 the „Hehearsal" on the public is well known, and it is 
 certain, that Dryden could not have thought of writing the 
 „Conquest of Granada" seven years afterwards with any 
 chance of success. 
 
 Dryden, however, behaved very prudently in the sight 
 of this defeat. He openly avowed, that he considered the 
 piece an injustice to him, but praised the humour and the 
 artistic form of it. 
 
 He had been thoroughly convinced, however, that he 
 would have to contrive a new method, if he wished to re- 
 tain the authority he had till then exercised in matters of 
 dramatic taste. He, accordingly, like a clever mechanic 
 
19 
 
 ivho can put his hand to a new pattern, if the old one is 
 found to have gone out of fashion, resolved to omit appa- 
 ritions and battles and to exhibit the action simpiy and 
 suitably by chiefly observing its unity and to develop the 
 characters and situations from inner causes, a resolve, the 
 reasons for which he expounded in his „Essay on Criti- 
 cism" prefixed as a preface to the play of „Troilus and 
 Cressida". The result of his endeavours in this respect 
 was the tragedy of „Aureng-Zebe" published in 1671. This 
 play certainly exhibits them unmistakeably, and there are 
 many passages in it which, on account of the natural show 
 of sentiment and the simplicity of expression may be read 
 with pleasure. It is still written in verse, but Dryden says 
 in the preface to it, that he is „grown weary of his long- 
 loved mistress" rhyme, „for the passions are not to be for- 
 ced into such narrow bounds". He accordingly never after- 
 wards produced a heroic play. „Thus the reign of heroic 
 tragedies which had been introduced at the restoration, en- 
 ded, after it had lasted about fifteen years, and the few he- 
 roic plays that afterwards appeared, never rose to public 
 favour". 
 
 Yet though he thenceforward abandoned verse, French in- 
 fluence may be traced in all his later plays. 
 
 The interval between the composition of the „Conquest 
 of Granada" and „Aureng-Zebe" is filied up by comedies, 
 which were all of indifferent value and indeed the product 
 rather of his necessities than of any desire to improve (he 
 state of tlie stage. His comedies have never commanded 
 a success equal to that of his tragedies. Comedy was cer- 
 tainly that species of stage -literature for which his genius 
 
20 
 
 was least fitted. This he acknowledges himself, as he says 
 in the defence of his essay on dramatic poetry: „I know 
 1 am not fitted by nature to write comedy; I want that gaiety 
 of humour which is required to it. My conversation is slow 
 and dull, my humour saturnine and reserved etc., so that 
 those that decry my comedies, do me no injury, except it 
 be in point of profit: reputation in them is the last thing 
 to which I shall pretend". Indeed, the mirth his comedies 
 excited, did not arise so much from the humour he dis- 
 played as from the conjunction of incongruous circumstan- 
 ces in them; all that he exhibited as humorous or passion- 
 ate, he seems to have had at second-hand, it consisted in 
 great part in imitation of other poets and it has never been 
 known, that any of his comedies ever called forth an out- 
 hurst of laughter or applause from the audience. 
 
 Of the plays he wrote after the wholesome lesson im- 
 parted by the „Rehearsal" the most valuable besides „Au- 
 reng-Zebe" are: „A11 for love or the world well lost, „a 
 tragedy founded on the story of Anthony and Cleopatra, 
 the „Spanish Friar" and „Don Sebastian" the latter of 
 which is generally considered the best of his dramatic per- 
 formances, because it made some approaches to the possi- 
 bilities of real life, though the humour of it was dull. The 
 dispute and reconciliation of Dorax and Sebastian, to all 
 intents and purposes a close imitation of the similar scene 
 of Brutus and Cassius in Shakspere's „Julius Caesar" is not 
 devoid of merit. „A11 for love" is also an imitation of 
 Shakspere's „Anthony and Cleopatra" and on account of 
 this connexion perhaps the most interesting of his plays. 
 A comparison between the two would however prove a very 
 
21 
 
 ungrateful and purposeless task, if it were not to increase 
 our admiration of Shakspere's genius. I consider it to 
 have been a very unlucky idea in Dryden to select just this 
 piece for imitation in which, perhaps more than in any 
 other of his plays, the dramatic power of Shakspere ap- 
 pears, as well in the admirable art Avith which he has 
 brought harmony into the multiplicity of events and cha- 
 racters as in the power with which he has here reproduced 
 the struggle between honourable actions and dishonourable 
 temptations, manly desires and effeminate corruption. That 
 Dr)'den did choose it, may well be considered as one of 
 the many profs that, though lavish in his praise of Shak- 
 spere, he did not in the least understand his real power 
 and greatness, and it seems highly probable, that he was 
 chiefly attracted by the gorgeousness of that play to imi- 
 tate it, as thereby able to attract his corrupted audience. 
 In Shakspere's play the love that bound Anthony and Cleo- 
 patra does not leave upon the mind of the spectator the 
 impression of the mere passion and sensual appetite, because 
 Shakspere has veiled them and atoned for that love by its 
 evident sincerity and depth, whereas Dryden has recommen- 
 ded as laudable and worthy of imitation that conduct which 
 can never but be utterly condemned in all respects. 
 
 The last piece Dryden wrote was a tragi -comedy cal- 
 led : „Love triumphant". It is said to have been unsuccess- 
 ful. Thus he began and ended his dramatical career with 
 ill success. 
 
 It is evident from the preceding sketch that, had Dry- 
 den written nothing but his plays, he would have exercised 
 but little influence on the English drama. He had, indeed, 
 
22 
 
 Hie good sense of referring his dramalic essays to rules 
 uhich he propounded as correct ones and thereby making 
 his efforts in dramatical composition acceptable to the pu- 
 blic, more particulary to that large class of educated men 
 who were satisfied with anything, so it was done according 
 to rules they considered imperative. But the merits for 
 which Dryden will always hold a conspicuous place in Eng- 
 lish literary history are the great impulse he gave to the 
 refinement of the language by precept not only but also by 
 example, and to the prosecution of dramatical criticism. The 
 severe blame he launt^hes against Shakspere and Jonson for 
 the language they used, is for the most part extremely 
 unjust and shows plainly, that Dryden was but superficially 
 acquainted with the language current at their time. He 
 may be justified, strictly speaking, in blaming a man 
 like Jonson who was supposed to be one of the greatest 
 scholars of the time, for certain improprieties of accidence 
 which an acutely grammatical mind ought to discover, but 
 it is still open to question whether Jonson would have 
 strictly adhered to faultless grammar even on the suppo- 
 sition of his having had a correct knowledge of it, at a 
 time, when the use of it would to common opinion have 
 appeared far- fetched, and the commonly established usage 
 was the law for writers. For Jonson's force, especially in 
 his comedies, consisted chiclly in showing off peculiarities 
 of men of the lower and middle classes of society, it is 
 llierefore plain, (hat he could not be too nice as to points 
 of strict grammar. Besides there arc nmny things which 
 Dryden blames as ungrammaiical, and which, as they were 
 not considered so at the time Jonson wrote, would not be 
 
23 
 
 deemed faulty even ia our own days, as, for instance, 
 placing the preposition governing a relative pronoun at the 
 end of a sentence, this custom, moreover, consisting in 
 strict analogy with the usage in cognate modern langua- 
 ges as the Swedish and Danish at the present day. And, 
 to sav' the truth, there can he gathered from Dryden's wri- 
 tings, notwithstanding their generally very elegant charac- 
 ter, numerous ungrammatical turns, though they probably will 
 be excused by his admirers with carelessness and great 
 haste in writing, but there are faults of accidence conti- 
 nually recurring as, for instance, the use of an adjective 
 instead of the qualifying adverb before another adjective. 
 But that being the custom of the time at which Dryden 
 wTOte, a custom that even at this day obtains generally in 
 America to which country it was introduced by the Pilgrim 
 fathers, it would be unfair to censure him for it. The great 
 merit of Dryden as a refiner of the language consists in the 
 propriety he evinces in the choice of words, hi justly com- 
 bining such as would exactly suit the matter they are to 
 exhibit, he has attained to the ease and elegance of his 
 st}'le. The proper choice of words is one of the chief 
 conditions of a clear and correct style, the misuse of them 
 generally furnishes an indication as to the backwardness 
 of mental culture in a writer. Such misuse of words being 
 once introduced in the literary productions of a nation, it 
 will be continued by custom, and thus we generally find in 
 the works belonging to the middle-ages the prevalence of 
 either bombast or feebleness of expression, things of small 
 account being exhibited in words of great strength, and con- 
 versely, imporlant notions not being adequately represented 
 
24 
 
 by the words used in their delinea^on. The greatest praise 
 is therefore due to those men who, favoured by nature 
 with the taste of original propriety, first practised this de- 
 licacy of selection and who, aided by genius and parts, rose 
 to sufficient literary authority to induce posterity, to follow 
 up the tract they had opened up for them. It seldom hap- 
 pens, that the prose writings of a nation attain to that 
 high standard by successive and slow improvements to which 
 one clear mind may suddenly give the impulse. This man 
 to English modern literature was Dryden. The refinement 
 he wrought in the language is due not only to his prose 
 compositions but perhaps even in a greater measure to his 
 translations of ancient epics and his improvements in the 
 art of versification. Though Dryden cannot be said to have 
 made any great advances in literature, it is certain, that he 
 improved his versification as he advanced in years and produc- 
 tiveness. Mr. Harte fixes the year 1676 as the period at 
 which Dryden settled his versification, when, after the pu- 
 blication of the play of „Aureng-Zebe" the poet says of him- 
 self, he had obtained the full effect of diligence and had 
 added facility to exactness. It may be mentioned as a cu- 
 rious proof of the great want in Dryden of poetical taste 
 during the earlier part of his career, that in the poem: „an- 
 nus mirabilis" published in 1066 he laboured under the im- 
 pression, that technical expressions ought to be employed in 
 poetry, whenever the subject demanded them. The following 
 verse in „nautical language'' occurring among others of a 
 similar nature in the poem alluded to, is perhaps one of 
 the most curious conceits that the literature of any nation 
 can boast of: 
 
25. 
 
 ,,So here some picko ut bullets from the side, 
 Some drive old oakum through each seam and rift 
 Their left hand does the can Iking -iron guide, 
 The rattling mallet with the right they lift". 
 As Dryden had been the principal introducer of rhyme into 
 English dramatical literature, it may not be out of place to 
 give a short account of his versification. There will be 
 little doubt of the justice of the praise Pope bestowed on 
 Dryden when he says: 
 .... Dryden taught to join 
 The varying verse, the full resounding line, 
 The long majestic march and energy divine, 
 if said of the mere mechanism of verse and in comparison 
 to the eflforts of preceding writers. He appears never to 
 have been at a loss for a rhyme, and the smoothness and 
 ease with which his verses flow, is certainly remarkable, if 
 it is considered, that he, in most instances, sent his verses 
 to the press as soon as a certain number had been com- 
 posed. 
 
 His favourite form of verse was the Alexandrine which 
 he imitated from the French. In Dryden's Alexandrine some 
 deviations from the French verse are, however, worthy of 
 note. The French verse invariably consists of twelve syl- 
 lables, that of Dryden, in imitation of Drayton, frequently 
 alternated. with twelve and fourteen; another difference is, 
 that the French always have a caesura in the sixth sylla- 
 ble, a rule^ which Dryden frequently violated. Couplets of 
 fourteen syllables were used before Dryden's time and have 
 lately been revived by Macaulay in his „Lays of ancient 
 Rome", they are, however, now generally used in the form 
 
26 
 
 of quatrains of eight and six syllables alternately. Dryden 
 seldom abandons the use of couplets; the „annus mirabi- 
 lis" is the only one of his larger poems where he used 
 quartains, a measure that he ever afterwards discontinued, 
 on account of its difficulty which he himself acknowledged. 
 He frequently intermixed his couplets with triplets to give 
 more variety to them; these were marked with brackets in 
 the margin in order to direct the attention of the reader 
 to them beforehand, so that he might not stop short m 
 reading them. There is no doubt that variety in verse 
 is a great ornament to it, an ornament which English verse 
 most readily admits of in allowing the substitution of simi- 
 litude for identity of rhyme, but the essence of verse being 
 regularity, such variety must not be introduced at the risk 
 of disappointing the ear. A mechanical direction such as 
 that used in the triplets, is certainly something very clumsy 
 and unskilful. There is, however, scarcely a measure which 
 Dryden has not tried, and the specimens he has given are 
 w^orthy the name of models, as they are most elegant and 
 correct. Johnson blames them for two frequent shortcom- 
 ings, in the first place, that they have frequent endings 
 of the first line with a weak syllable, whereas the second 
 ends with a strong one, in the second place, that his pe- 
 riods frequently terminate the first line of a couplet. I do 
 not, however, see any reason to object to this, as those 
 who follow the contrary use, have nothing more in favoui* 
 of them than custom. 
 
 Dryden's chief influence on the development of the Eng- 
 lish drama consists, as I have said above, in his dramati- 
 cal criticisms. To us who have by the successive efforts 
 
21 
 
 of powerful writers and crilics attained to a clear insight 
 into the striictiire of dramatical poems, there is certainly in 
 Dryden's criticisms little that is new. The very question 
 he generally discusses in them of the unities of time, place 
 and action has since been so frequently worked up and so 
 completely exhausted, that it could scarcely be expected of 
 a man of average literary attainments that be should with 
 any amount of pleasure and satisfaction read through Dry- 
 den's treatises, if it were not for the elegance of the lan- 
 guage, the artful and varied representation of opposite pro- 
 babilities, the clearness of the illustrations and the animated 
 and rigorous sprightliness they exhibit. Though these me- 
 rits in the eyes of succeeding ages coalesce with his refi- 
 nement of language, yet to his contemporaries his essays 
 had the accompanying merit of being the first in the lan- 
 guage that afforded a clear insight into the art of drama- 
 tical composition and directed attention to the prosecu- 
 tion of such enquiries. Further than this their original 
 value is not great, for even in Dryden's time there was to 
 those who were acquainted with the contemporary drama 
 of foreign nations little in them that was novel as, indeed, 
 our author is taxed by Martin Clifford in his letters on 
 Dry den published iu the year 1674, „to have stollen the 
 essay on dramatic poetry from Mons. Hedelin, Menardine and 
 Corneille", but at a time in which booics were compara- 
 tively rare and literary communication was not frequent be- 
 tween the nations, the effect of Dryden's essays must not 
 be underrated. It is, however, impossible to say what rules 
 Dryden has really laid down in his essays, for as his cri- 
 ticism is in every instance occasional, he has no hesitation 
 
28 
 
 to lay down as a rule that which may suit his purpose at 
 (he time, even on the manifest danger of unsaying what he 
 had said before. Constancy was not one of the component 
 parts of his mind, and the same fickleness that induced him 
 to change his religion three times at the spur of the mo- 
 ment, may also be traced in his criticism. Trapp, speaking 
 of Dryden's eulogy of the „Canterbury Tales'' well sketches 
 this inconstancy in saying: „NoYiraus viri illius maximi non 
 semper accuratissimas esse censuras, nee ad severissimam 
 critices normara exactas : illo judice id plerumque optimum est 
 quod nunc prae manibus habet et in quo nunc occupatur". 
 Thus the question of Dryden's influence on the English 
 drama resolves itself into this : If he has generally been set 
 down by English critics as having introduced the French 
 taste, that opinion must be held to be correct as far as 
 the result of his writings is concerned, but it wants con- 
 siderable qualification with regard to his intention to do so. 
 As he was without doubt the most talented dramatical wri- 
 ter of his time and as he considered himself dependent 
 upon the favour of (he great in the career he had chosen, 
 and thereby obliged to flatter their tastes, all the praise 
 and blame of introducing the style favoured at court, falls, 
 of course, upon him. It may therefore reasonably be said 
 of him, that he was the introducer of the French taste by 
 the force of circumstances. He had little sensibility of the 
 power of eflusions purely natural, simplicity gave him no plea- 
 sure, ratiocination was the favourite exercise of his mind. 
 The endeavour after the grand and new produced many 
 sentiments, either great or bulky and images, either just or 
 merely splendid. 
 
29 
 
 Yet lasting and important was his influence on the Eng- 
 lish drama, indirectly in refining the language and directly 
 in raising it from the state of a purely natural effusion to 
 the rank of a regular work of art, and of pointing out the 
 road to excellence, though he himself was unable to at- 
 tain it.