A Select Collection of Old English Plays Volume I Part 1

A Select Collection of Old English Plays.

Volume I.

by R. Dodsley.

PREFACE.

After the lapse of about half a century since the issue of the last edition of _Dodsley's Select Collection of Old Plays_,[1] and the admittance of that work into the honourable rank of scarce and dear books, it seemed a desirable thing to attempt, with such additional improvements as might be practicable or expedient, a revival of a publication which has been a favourite with the lovers of our early drama since its first publication more than a hundred years ago. Between 1744, the date of its original appearance, and 1825, it pa.s.sed through three editions; and it may be remarked that the tendency in each successive edition has been to remodel the undertaking on the principle of rejecting plays which from time to time have been lifted up (so to speak) into the collected works of their respective authors, and to subst.i.tute for them plays which have either suffered unmerited obscurity in original and rare editions, or have lain so far scattered about in various other collections; and in the present instance that principle has been strictly adhered to.[2]

It is desirable that it should be seen precisely in what manner, and to what extent, the edition now offered differs from its predecessors as regards the contents. The points of variation are three: 1. Omissions; 2.

Additions of pieces not included in the former editions; 3. Additional plays now first reprinted from the originals. The first division comprises the following productions which, since the last republication of Dodsley, have been taken up into the collected editions of their respective authors:--

Ferrex and Porrex _Sackville, &c_.

Alexander and Campaspe _Lyly_.

Jew of Malta _Marlowe_.

Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay _Greene_.

Edward the First _Peele_ Edward the Second _Marlowe_.

Pinner of Wakefield _Greene_.

Four Prentices of London _Heywood_.

Mayor of Quinborough _Middleton_.

Malcontent _Marston, &c_.

All Fools _Chapman_.

Woman Killed with Kindness _Heywood_.

Honest Wh.o.r.e (two parts) _Decker and Middleton_.

The White Devil _Webster_.

Eastward Hoe _Marston, &c_.

A Mad World, my Masters _Middleton_.

The Roaring Girl _Middleton_.

The Widow's Tears _Chapman_.

The Widow _Jonson, &c_.

The Wits _Davenant_.

The Jovial Crew _Brome_.

The second and third characteristics of our book are the ADDITIONS, which, as we have stated, are of two kinds. In the first place, we may enumerate the dramas new to Dodsley's collection, though previously edited in a variety of forms:

Interlude of the Four Elements _Anon_.

Disobedient Child _Ingelend_.

Trial of Treasure _Anon_.

Youth _Anon_.

l.u.s.ty Juventus _Wever_.

Hickscorner, An Interlude _Anon_.

Everyman, An Interlude _Anon_.

Pardoner and Friar, An Interlude _Heywood_.

Jack Juggler _Anon_.

Thersites Interludes _Anon_.

Ralph Roister Doister _Udall_.

Cambyses _Preston_.

Conflict of Conscience _Woodes_.

Three Ladies of London _Wilmot_.

Three Lords and Three Ladies of London _Wilmot_.

Rare Triumphs of Love and Fortune _Anon_.

Knack to Know a Knave _Anon_.

Jeronimo (Part the First) _Anon_.

Two Angry Women of Abingdon _Porter_.

Spanish Tragedy _Kyd_.

Solyman and Perseda _Anon_.

How a Man may choose a Good Wife from a Bad _Anon_.

Englishmen for my Money _Haughton_.

Second Maiden's Tragedy _Anon_.

Wily Beguiled _Anon_.

Return from Parna.s.sus _Anon_.

New Wonder _Rowley_.

Rebellion _Rawlins_.

l.u.s.t's Dominion _Anon_.

"The Lost Lady," by Sir William Berkley or Barkley; "The Marriage Night,"

by Lord Falkland; "The Shepherd's Holiday," by Joseph b.u.t.ter; "Andromana," by J.S., and "All Mistaken, or the Mad Couple," which were given by Dodsley in 1744, but were omitted in the second and third impressions, have been restored to their places.

The remaining feature, recommending the undertaking to indulgent notice, is perhaps the most important and interesting. Subjoined is a list of the dramatic compositions which have never hitherto appeared in any series of Old English Plays, and of which the originals are of the utmost rarity:--

1. The Tragi-Comedy of Calisto and Melibaea, 1520.

2. Nice Wanton, An Interlude, 1560.

3. An Interlude, called Like Will to Like, by Ulpian Fulwell, 1568.

4. The History of Jacob and Esau, 1568.

5. The Marriage of Wit and Science, 1570.

A strictly chronological arrangement has been adopted. Such a plan appeared to be the most desirable and the most obvious, as it facilitates our appreciation of the gradual and progressive development of dramatic composition. If it may be thought to labour under any disadvantage, it is perhaps that it has the effect of throwing into a single consecutive series, without discrimination, pieces which are mere interludes, and others which are characterised by higher qualities, and aspire to belong to the regular drama. But the evil will be found not to be of a very serious kind, and it will disappear after the earlier volumes of the collection.

In fixing the order of sequence, the place of a production in the series has been occasionally determined by the date at which it is believed to have been written or presented, rather than by the date at which it left the printer's hands. Such is the case with Heywood's "Pardoner and Friar," and the anonymous interlude of "New Custom;" as well as with "Ralph Roister Doister," and "Gammer Gurton's Needle," all of which may be taken to belong to a period some time anterior to their publication.

A leading characteristic of the collection as now reconstructed is the great preponderance of pieces, of which the authors are not known, or by authors who have not left more than one or two dramatic productions. It was judged expedient, in the interest of purchasers, to give a preference to these single or anonymous plays, as it will probably not be long before the works of every voluminous writer are collected. Those of Jonson, Shirley, Peele, Greene, Ford, Ma.s.singer, Middleton, and Chapman, have already been edited, and Brome's, Deckers, Heywood's, and Glapthorne's will follow in due course. To all these the new DODSLEY will serve as a supplement and companion.

The editor felt himself in a position of somewhat special difficulty and delicacy, when it became necessary to consider the question of retaining or excluding the prefatory matter attached to the impressions of this work in 1744 and 1780. A careful and impartial perusal of that matter made it evident that the prudent course, on the whole, was to reject these prolegomena. There was no alternative but their entire preservation or their entire suppression; for any arbitrary alterations or curtailments would have been liable to objection or censure. In the first place, there was Dodsley's own preface, chiefly occupied by a sketch of the history of our stage, but based on the most imperfect information, and extremely unsatisfactory, if not misleading. Then there was, like Pelion heaped on Ossa, Isaac Reed's introduction, more elaborate and copious than Dodsley's, yet far from complete or systematic, and not improved by the presence of an appendix or sequel. Reed, of course, went over the same ground as Dodsley had already traversed with inferior ability and less ample resources at his command, and there were repet.i.tions, as might be expected, of the same particulars. There seemed to be two forms of weakness--redundancy on the one hand and meagreness on the other. Again, all the information collected by Dodsley and Reed was to be found elsewhere, with innumerable improvements and corrections of mistakes, the subject itself more methodically handled, and the early annals of the English drama and theatre almost presented to the public view under a new aspect, by Mr Collier, in his well-known work printed in 1831, a publication heartily welcomed and appreciated at the time of its appearance and long after, and even now a literary monument, of which it may be said that, with whatever defects it may possess, it reflects as much credit on its author as a far more perfect performance brought to completion at the present day under more favourable auspices could reflect on any one else. It was a long advance on anything which had been attempted so far in the same direction; and to reproduce, in the face of Mr Collier's volumes, the obsolete and superseded labours of Dodsley and even Reed, seemed to be a waste of s.p.a.ce which might be far more beneficially occupied by additional texts.

As regards the orthography, it has to be pointed out that, in consonance with the system adopted by Dyce and others, it has been reduced to our modern standard; but at the same time it should be understood that the _language_ of the writers has in every case been held sacred. Than the spelling which occurs in early plays and tracts, more especially perhaps those of a popular character, nothing can well be more capricious and uncouth; but the phraseology and terms are on all accounts of value. Not a word, therefore, nor even part of a word, has suffered alteration; and wherever there was a doubt, as there might be in preparing for the press once more such an extensive collection of pieces, it was thought better to err on the side of caution. Weever, the author of "Funeral Monuments,"

retained with scrupulous exact.i.tude the ancient spelling _ipsissimis verbis_; and such a plan might be advisable and convenient with sepulchral inscriptions or records; but in the matter before us what an editor had princ.i.p.ally, if not almost exclusively, to consider, was the preservation in their fullest integrity of the language of the time and the sense of the playwright.

The first and second editions of Dodsley's collection appear, notwithstanding what is a.s.serted to the contrary in Reed's preface, to have been superintended with no very high degree of care, and the late Mr Dyce, indeed, used to observe that the same criticism was applicable to the edition of 1825. But the latter, with the fullest admission of its defects, is certainly marked by great improvements on its predecessors in more than one way. The labours of Hawkins[3] and Dilke[4] reflect considerable honour upon those gentlemen.

It is almost superfluous to observe that the preceding editions, the last and best not excepted, present a very large number of statements, opinions, and readings, which more recent and more exact information has shown to be erroneous. All these mistakes have been carefully rectified, wherever the knowledge and experience of the editor enabled him to detect them.[5]

A certain number of corruptions and obscurities remain, which it pa.s.sed the editor's ingenuity to eradicate or clear away. The printed remains of our early drama have come down to us, for the most part, in a sadly mutilated state, and the attempt to amend and restore the text to its original purity will, it may be safely affirmed, never succeed more than to a very imperfect extent. Even the late Mr Dyce's revised edition of Shakespeare, 1868, abounds with misprints and other distortions of the writer's sense; and we must abandon in some cases the hope of ever arriving at the true readings. So it is with the miscellaneous a.s.semblage of dramatic productions here brought together. A great deal has been done by a succession of editors to reduce the errors of the printer or copyist to a minimum; but, after all, there are places where it would require the a.s.sistance of the Sphinx to supply a chasm, or rectify a palpable mistake.

The work, in its present state, should a.s.suredly have some degree of interest and worth; for it offers in one collected body the best specimens of dramatic literature which the English language affords, castigated and enriched by some of our best commentators and critics.

In these volumes, as now rearranged, it is trusted that very few uncollected plays of real importance will be found wanting; but as an enterprise of this kind can never amount to more than a _selection_, as it purports to be, it appeared judicious, in making the choice, to give the preference to such pieces as either ill.u.s.trated the manners of the period, or marked the gradual development of the dramatic art.

The only basis on which the present editor can rest, so far as he is aware, the slightest claim to credit is the attention which he has bestowed on the rearrangement of the collection as it now stands; the conscientious and vigilant supervision of the whole matter here brought together--prefaces, texts, and notes--and the correction of errors on the part of his predecessors, occasioned by a variety of causes. In carrying out even this unambitious programme, there was a fair share of labour and difficulty, and, of course, it has involved the addition of a new crop of notes scattered up and down the series, as well as the occasional displacement of certain ill.u.s.trative remarks founded on wrong _data_.