sonnet,' and the considerable knowledge of Latin shown in the plays. Brome probably began his relations with Jonson as a witty young serving-man who interested his master to such an extent that he undertook his education, as he had already that of the young Nathaniel Field. And this education might have been undertaken originally as much for the convenience of the master as the improvement of the servant. Colley Cibber, in his List of Dramatic Authors, boldly asserts that Brome had his education at Eton'; but as Cibber is eleven years astray concerning the date of his death, and very carelessly misdates the publication of many of the plays, this extremely improbable and unauthoritative statement is negligible. However, his education, wherever he got it, was quite respectable. His English is always correct, and his vocabulary ample, with an occasional fondness for unusual Latin derivatives. His style is distinctly more colloquial than academic. But the important indication that he received some scholastic knowledge is the number and correctness of his classical quotations and allusions. The pedant in the City Wit, and the curate in the Queen and Concubine, continually use snatches of Latin phrases that show at least a knowledge of grammar on the part of the author. Dr. Bayne thinks that these have a sprightliness and comicality which indicate that his Latin was not acquired late in life. On the other hand, the somewhat pedantic kaleidoscope of not uncommon classical allusions in the Court Begger, if they indicate anything at all, suggest, I think, the opposite. Then Brome's quotations are always very obvious, like monstrum horrendum, hinc illæ lachrymæ, and Iamque opus exegi quod nec Iovis ira, nec ignis. The last, for instance, occurs in at least four conspicuous places in contemporary letters. And such phrases as non progredi est regredi, euphoniæ gratia, or deceptio visus might be culled any Sunday from a sermon at St. Paul's; while a very fair stock of mere allusions might be found in a sententious almanac. The few French phrases in the New Academy and the Sparagus Garden, although they are idiomatic and correct, of course prove nothing as to Brome's knowledge of the language, and Ward's suggestion,' based on two sentences in the Novella, that perhaps he knew a little German, is even more doubtful than that he knew French. Again, it would be very unsafe to base any conjecture concerning his connection with the profession of law on the knowledge of legal jargon shown in Covent Garden Weeded 2. 1, and to a slighter extent elsewhere in Brome; for in all his works there is not half so much of this kind of lore as in a single play of Jonson's-as, for instance, the Staple of News. In fact, for all the special knowledge of languages and law in the plays, I think there is nothing to show more than a ready memory, and a clever ability at making a little knowledge go a long way. We may sum him up as he, or Heywood, did a character in the Lancashire Witches 2: 'It seems he is a peece of a scholar.' What because he hath read a little Scriveners Latine, hee never proceeded farther in his Accidence than to Mentire non est meum; and that was such a hard lesson to learn that he stuck at mentire; and cu'd never reach to non est meum : since, a meere Ignaro, and not worth acknowledgment.' A hint of Brome's training by Jonson, and of his position in the household, is given in an entry in the Herbert MS. for Oct. 2, 1623, on licensing a play3 ' for the Princes Company (at the Red Bull). A new comedy 1 Dict. Nat. Biog. 6. 395. 2 Heywood, Works 4. 175. called a Fault in Friendship, written by young Johnson and Broome.' This was Benjamin Jonson, Jr. of whom we know nothing except that his father obtained the post of Master of the Revels for him in 1635, and that he died in November of the same year.1 The comedy is lost, but the record of its authorship shows that Jonson was training Brome and his own son together in the art of playmaking. Six years later (Feb. 9, 1629), another play was licensed, this time by Brome alone, called the Love-sick Maid, or the Honour of Young Ladies. This pleased the court so well that the actors of the King's Company on March 10 presented Herbert with 2 £ 'on its good success.'2 By the date of this play Brome seems to have become a professional playwright, and to have severed his intimate connection with his former master. In fact, the relations between the two seem, at least for a time, to have been somewhat strained. The evidence for this is found in Jonson's Ode to Himself written after what he considered the failure of the New Inn (1629). At the end of the octavo edition of the New Inn (1631) is the ode, which is headed, The just indignation the author tooke at the vulgar censure of his Play, by some malicious spectators, begat the following Ode to himself. This edition appeared two years after the production of the play. Another copy of the ode appeared after Jonson's death, bound up with his translation of the Art of Poetry, in 1640. Another copy, almost identical with this second, was discovered by Dr. G. B. Tennants in Bodleian MS. Ashmole 38, pp. 80, 81. The third stanza of the edition of 1631 reads: 1 Dict. Nat. Biog. 30. 182. 2 Fleay, Chronicle Hist. p. 334. 3 Tennant's ed. New Inn (Yale Studies in English, No. 34), Introduction, pp. xxi ff. Life No doubt some mouldy tale Like Pericles; and stale As the Shrieves crusts, and nasty as his fish- Throwne forth and rack't into the common tub, As the best order'd meale. For, who the relish of these ghests will fit, Needs set them, but, the almes-basket of wit. The other two copies have for lines 7 and 8: Broomes sweeping(s) doe as well Gifford's explanation of the difference in the versions is : 'There seems to have existed a wish among the poet's friends to embroil him with his old servant, Richard Brome it was, however, without effect, for the envious Ben continued to esteem him to the close of his life.' Gifford then brings in evidence the fact that Jonson wrote prefatory verses for the Northern Lass in 1632, which I shall quote presently. He says, further, in his note on these verses printed in Underwoods, No. 281: 'I have already noticed the attempts of Randolph and others to create a feeling of hostility in our poet towards Brome. That they met with no success is evident ; for Jonson always remained warmly attached to his old and meritorious servant, and Brome continued no less grateful,' etc. Ward follows Gifford in this point, but Fleay3 declares 'Broomes sweepings' to be undoubtedly the original reading, which was altered in the published edition. He says Jonson' was jealous of his dead master, Shakespeare, and his living faithful servant, Brome.' 1 Works 8. 342. 2 Ward, Hist. Eng. Dram. Lit. 3. 126, and Dict. Nat. Biog. 3 Biog. Chron. 1. 352. Dr. Tennant,1 I think, has proved Fleay's statement correct without much doubt. His reasons for believing in the priority of the version of MS. Ashmole 38 and 1640 over that of 1631 are, first, that the last stanza in the latter is unquestionably improved in structure. Secondly, the use of the word' sweepings' is utterly flat without a reference to Brome. Thirdly, there is a very good reason for Jonson's anger to be found in the fact that Brome's Love-sick Maid, which was such a great success, was produced only three weeks after the failure of the New Inn. And, finally, most of the replies to the ode seem to indicate that the authors saw in MS. the copy that contained the reading, 'Broomes sweepings.' Dr. Tenannt sums up the whole question as follows: With such facts before one, how easy it is to understand the mention of' Broomes sweepings' in Jonson's Ode, on the supposition that it was written while illness and the sting of failure combined to make him express resentment at the success of one he knew was his inferior; and how natural it was that when two years had worn off the bitterness of such an experience, he should be unwilling to perpetuate the abuse of his old servant.' It is undoubtedly to this temporary estrangement of Jonson and Brome that Alexander Brome alludes in his verses prefatory to the Jovial Crew2 (1652): Thy luck to please so well: who could go faster? At first to be the Envy of thy Master. Randolph's reply to Jonson's Ode, alluded to above, contains the following reference to Brome3: 1 Ed. New Inn, Introduction. |