Appendix to Chapter V

139

acts Iv, v, sc. 1 (a), 2, 3; Massinger, acts I, III, sc. 1, act v, sc. 1(b). Partly from part II of Guzman de Alfarache (vol. 1, chap. 4), or from a similar story elsewhere.

The Lawes of Candy, about 1620. Probably Massinger and another author (not Fletcher) Partly from Cinthio, Hecatommithi, dec. x, nov. 9.

The False One, about 1620. Fletcher, acts II, III, IV; Massinger, acts I, V. The double Marriage, about 1620. Fletcher, acts II, III, sc. 2, 3, act IV, sc. 3, 4, act v, sc. 1; Massinger, acts I, III, sc. 1, act Iv, sc. 1, 2, act v, sc. 2, 3. For the plot, cf. Gesta Romanorum, tale 5.

The Pilgrim, acted at court, Christmas 1621. Fletcher. Perhaps partly from d'Audiguier, Les diverses fortunes de Pamphile et de Nise (1614), which, again, is from Lope de Vega's romance El Peregrino en su patria; but the resemblance is only in trifling details, and there may be no connection. The Wild-Goose Chase, acted at court, 1621; printed 1652. Fletcher. The Island Princesse, acted at court, 1621. Fletcher. From La Conquista de las Islas Malucas by Bart. de Argensola, printed 1609; but Fletcher deviates from his source in acts IV and v.

The Beggars Bush, acted at court, 1622, but produced probably some time earlier. Fletcher, act II, sc. 1, 2, acts III, IV; Massinger, acts I, II, sc. 3, act v. The Prophetesse, licensed 14 May 1622. Fletcher, acts I, III, v, sc. 3; Massinger, acts II, IV, V, sc. 1, 2. Partly historical: the story of Diocletian and the prophetess is told by Vopiscus.

The Sea Voyage, licensed 22 June 1622. Authors doubtful: considerable portions of acts I and IV are by Fletcher, but no scene, as we have it, can be attributed wholly to him; it is doubtful whether Massinger had any share: the metre, generally, is very defective.

The Spanish Curate, licensed 24 Oct. 1622. Fletcher, acts II, III, sc. 1, 2, 4, act IV, sc. 3, 5, 6, 7, act v, sc. 2; Massinger, acts I, III, sc. 3, act IV, sc. 1, 2, 4, act v, sc. 1, 3 (Massinger deals with the main plot, and Fletcher with the underplot). From Gerardo the Unfortunate Spaniard, a translation, published 1622, of the (prose) romance by Gonzalo de Cespedes y Meneses, entitled Poema tragico del Español Gerardo. The situation in the main plot, of Don Henrique, Don Jamie, etc., is from the conclusion of the first part of Gerardo, pp. 231 ff. (ed. 1622), but the final development is different: the plot of Leandro, Lopez, etc. follows closely the story told by Leandro in the second part, pp. 246-266, omitting the conclusion as supplied by Violante.

The Maid in the Mill, licensed Aug. 1623, as by Fletcher and W. Rowley. Fletcher, acts I, III, sc. 2, 3, act v, sc. 2 (a). From Gerardo, pp. 394-418, with change of conclusion, and Painter, bk. II, nov. 22.

The Lovers Progress, end of 1623 (by list of actors); the original play was, perhaps, The Wandering Lovers, licensed 6 Dec. 1623 as by Fletcher. In its present form it has been revised by Massinger (see prologue), and this being a case of revision and not cooperation, mixed work is to be expected and occurs frequently. Acts IV and v are almost entirely by Massinger. From d'Audiguier, Histoire tragicomique de nostre temps sous les noms de Lysandre et de Caliste, 1616.

A Wife for a Month, licensed 27 May 1624 (the name of Tooley among the actors is probably a mistake for Lowin). Fletcher.

Rule a Wife And have a Wife, licensed 19 Oct. 1624, printed 1640. Fletcher. The underplot is from Cervantes, El Casamiento engañoso (Nov. Exempl.).

The Two Noble Kinsmen, date uncertain; printed as by Fletcher and Shakespeare, 1634. Fletcher wrote act II, sc. 3, 4, 5, act III, sc. 3, 4, 5, 6, act iv, sc. 1, 2, act v, sc. 2, and parts of other scenes. From Chaucer's Knight's Tale.

The Nice Valour, or, The Passionate Mad-man, in its present form not earlier than 1624 (allusions in act v, sc. 3), but the play bears marks of revision, and was, perhaps, originally much earlier. Fletcher and another, perhaps Rowley, but Fletcher's part is much altered.

The Chances, acted 1625 or 1626 (after Fletcher's death, see prologue). Fletcher, but probably touched here and there by another hand, e.g. in act 1, sc. 1, 9, act II, sc. 4. From Cervantes, La Señora Cornelia (Nov. Exempl.). The Elder Brother, acted after Fletcher's death (see prologue), printed 1637. Fletcher, acts II, III, IV; Massinger, acts 1, v. Source connected with that of Calderon's later drama, De una causa dos efectos.

The Faire Maide of the Inne, licensed 22 Jan. 1626. Massinger and another (not Fletcher). The disowning of Cesario by his mother is probably taken from La Cour Sainte of Nicolas Caussin, published in 1624 (not 1632, as stated by Koeppel). The plot of the play does not at all resemble the story of La ilustre Fregona of Cervantes.

The Noble Gentleman, licensed 3 Feb. 1626 as by Fletcher. He may have planned the play and written some passages, but no complete scene can be attributed to him.

Loves Cure, or The Martial Maid, date uncertain but not earlier than 1622 in its present form. No scene can be attributed to Fletcher; Massinger probably wrote acts I, IV, V, sc. 1, 2. There is no real ground for the suggestion (by Stiefel, A. L.) that this play is taken from the Spanish comedy by Guillén de Castro, La fuerza de la costumbre. The two dramas are founded on the same story, but the treatment is entirely different.

The Night-Walker, or the Little Theife, licensed as corrected by Shirley, 11 May 1633; printed 1640; the original play was, perhaps, as early as 1614. As it stands, the first three acts are by Fletcher, with revision, and the last two by Shirley, who must have rewritten this part of the play.

Loves Pilgrimage, revived 1635, with alterations, perhaps by Shirley, including some matter from Jonson's New Inne. Fletcher appears most markedly in act 1, sc. 2, acts II and III. From Cervantes, Las dos Doncellas (Nov. Exempl.). A Very Woman, or The Prince of Tarent, licensed 1634; printed as Massinger's, 1655, and never included among Beaumont and Fletcher's plays. As we have it, it is revised from an earlier drama (see prologue): Fletcher was probably the author of acts III and IV, sc. 1, 3. It is commonly identified with A Woman's Plot, acted at court 1621, because of the entry in Stationers' register, 9 Sept. 1653 of 'A Very Woman or The Woman's Plot,' but this second title has no justification in the play, and is, perhaps, a mistake.

The Coronation, printed in the folio of 1679, is by Shirley. The Widow, attributed in the quarto to Jonson, Fletcher and Middleton, is probably by Middleton.

The Faithful Friends was entered in Stationers' register, 29 June 1660 as by Beaumont and Fletcher, and first printed in Weber's edition, 1812; but it is not likely that they had any share in it.

The following appear to be lost: The History of Cardenio, entered in Stationers' register, 9 Sept. 1653 as by Fletcher and Shakespeare, and, perhaps, the same as the Cardenes, Cardema or Cardano, which was acted at court, 1613; The Jeweller of Amsterdam, entered Stationers' register, 8 April 1654 as by Fletcher, Field and Massinger, probably produced about 1616; A Woman's Plot, acted at court, 1621; The Devil of Dowgate, or Usury put to Use, 'written by Fletcher,' mentioned as a new play in Herbert's official register, 17 Oct. 1623; A Right Woman, entered in Stationers' register, 29 June 1660 as by Beaumont and Fletcher; Mador, King of Great Britain, attributed to Beaumont, Stationers' register, 29 June 1660. These two latter attributions must be regarded as very doubtful.

CHAPTER VI

PHILIP MASSINGER

EVERY biographer of Philip Massinger must echo the frequently repeated complaint that we know very little about the life of many of the chief dramatists of the times of Elizabeth and the first two Stewart kings. We may consider it an exceptional good fortune that we know at least the chief facts of Massinger's early days-that he was born at Salisbury in 1583, the son of Arthur Massinger, who, in some manner, was intimately connected with the 'noble family of the Herberts,' to use Philip's own expression, and who was evidently highly esteemed by his employers; that his baptism took place on 24 November 1583, and that he was entered on 14 May 1602 at St Alban hall in the university of Oxford. In 1606, he left the university for unexplained reasons without having taken his degree. From Oxford he came to London, where we lose sight of him for many years as totally as of the great immigrant from Stratford-on-Avon about twenty years before.

One fact, however, stands out clearly-that Massinger's London career was far from prosperous. When we hear of him again, in 1613 or 1614, we find him already immersed in those financial difficulties which remained the heavy burden of his life. He reappears as one of the three signatories of a petition for the loan of five pounds, addressed to that powerful personage to whom many needy dramatists used to look more or less hopefully-the theatrical manager and broker Philip Henslowe. In a few additional words, Massinger pathetically calls him his 'true loving friend,' and the joint request was granted. There was a similar pleading in 1615.

As in the case of this epistle to Henslowe, most of the first dramatic ventures of Massinger seem to have been joint productions. The first time we meet his name in print, on the title-page of an evidently successful drama, we find it coupled with the name of an older and very popular dramatist. In 1622

was published The Virgin Martir, a Tragedy, written by Philip Massinger and Thomas Dekker. But Dekker, whose poetical temper was different from Massinger's, was neither his first nor his most important fellow worker. A good many years before the composition of The Virgin Martir, he must have fallen under the sway of John Fletcher. It is a curious fact that no early edition of any one of those dramas which have been recognised as the joint labours of Fletcher and Massinger makes the slightest reference to the participation of the younger dramatist; all were printed as by Fletcher alone. Massinger seems to have been quite content to leave the risk and the glory to his teacher; so far as we know, he never protested against the omission of his name on the title-pages of the dramas printed during his lifetime. However, one of his most enthusiastic benefactors and friends, Sir Aston Cockayne, repeatedly insisted on the fact of Massinger's cooperation with Fletcher-an assertion which, in the case of a considerable number of Fletcherian plays, has received support from the philological researches of later times. And that he was buried in Fletcher's grave, probably by his own wish, may be taken as a striking proof that no coldness had arisen between Massinger and the man with whom he had associated in the early years of his dramatic writing.

We are not able to fix the time when Massinger ventured to present himself as an independent author to the public of the metropolis; but we may assume that this did not happen much before the end of the second decade of the seventeenth century. For the ensuing period of his life we possess a considerable number of direct utterances of his own, the authenticity of which is not to be questioned, but the biographical value of which is somewhat impaired by their official character and by the consideration necessarily shown in them for the position and feelings of the persons addressed. These utterances consist in the dedications prefixed by Massinger to the ten dramas published by himself. In these letters, Massinger's prose appears to the greatest advantage; it is, perhaps, a little pompous now and then, but it is clear and perfectly free from Euphuistic tricks of style.

Much less pleasing are the glimpses of the poet's private life afforded by these documents. Both the first dedication, preceding The Duke of Millaine (1623), and the last, composed for The Unnaturall Combat in 1639, about a year before his death, exhibit the poet as much dissatisfied with his vocation as a dramatic writer. He speaks of the misfortunes which cast him on this course and

Massinger's Personal Life

143

numbers himself among those whose 'necessitous fortunes' made them choose poetry as their profession. Complaints about the neglect which his age showed to the 'contemned sons of the Muses,' and about his own depressed circumstances, protestations that he could never have lived without the help of those kind patrons who endeavoured to rebuild the ruins of demolished poesy' and declarations of his gratitude and his devotion, are intermingled in these epistles with rarer outbursts of consciousness of his poetical powers, remarks about the intrinsic value of his works and hints that there were some eminent men who 'have not thought themselves disparaged, I dare not say honoured, to be celebrated the patrons of my humble studies.'

Two of the dedications show that the poet did his best to keep up that connection with the Pembroke family which he regarded as a paternal inheritance. In 1624, he dedicated his tragicomedy The Bond-Man to the younger brother of the third earl of Pembroke Philip Herbert, earl of Montgomery-with respectful allusions to the many happy years his father had spent in the service of that honourable house; and, nine years later, in 1633, he recommended his famous comedy A New Way to Pay Old Debts to the favourable acceptance of Montgomery's son-in-law, Robert Dormer, earl of Carnarvon, in very humble and complimentary terms. Besides these dedications, two of his rare non-dramatic poems refer to members of the same family. One of these poems is a poetical supplication of uncertain date, addressed to the 'Earl of Pembroke, Lord Chamberlain.' The earl's Christian name is missing; but the whole tenor of this petition leads to the conclusion that it was meant to reach the ear of the third earl of Pembroke, the William Herbert frequently mentioned in biographies of Shakespeare, who had been appointed lord chamberlain in 1615. It is to be feared, however, that this most persuasive poetical begging-letter, in which Massinger speaks of his 'trod-down poverty,' had not the desired effect; for, had the earl proved kind, Massinger would assuredly have shown his gratitude by dedicating one of his later dramas to this powerful nobleman. There is an old tradition that William Herbert had been the protector of young Massinger during the years of his university life, but had withdrawn his helping hand later, for unknown reasons. This rumour is not verified by the epistle in question, the manuscript of which was rediscovered but a few years ago; for it contains no reference to former benefits received by the poet.