The Dramatic Works of John Dryden Part 15

[25] See some specimens of these poems, vol. ix.

[26] Vol. vi.; vol. x

[27] In a satire against Settle, dated April 1682, ent.i.tled, "A Character of the True-blue Protestant Poet," the author exclaims, "One would believe it almost incredible, that any out of Bedlam should think it possible, a yesterday's fool, an errant knave, a despicable coward, and a prophane atheist, should be to-day by the same persons, a Cowley, a man of honour, an hero, and a zealous upholder of the Protestant cause and interest."

[28] In the "Deliverance," an address to the Prince of Orange, published about 9th February 1689:--

"Alas! the famous Settle, Durfey, Tate, That early propped the deep intrigues of state, Dull Whiggish lines the world could ne'er applaud, While your swift genius did appear abroad: And then, great Bayes, whose yet unconquered pen Wrote with strange force as well of beasts as men, Whose n.o.ble genius grieved from afar, Because new worlds of Bayes did not appear, Now to contend with the ambitious elf, Begins a civil war against himself," etc.

[29] In 1702, probably in the capacity of civic-laureate, he wrote "_Carmen Irenic.u.m_," upon the union of the two East India companies; and long afterward, in 1717, he is mentioned by Dennis as still the city poet.

[30] He published a translation of the tenth satire of Juvenal, in the preface to which he rails plentifully against Dryden.

[31] [The omission of Marston here is remarkable, because no satirist exhibits this extraordinary roughness of versification more glaringly.

Scott can hardly have read him.--ED.]

I infer, that the want of harmony was intentional, from these expressions: "It is not for every one to relish a true and natural satire; being of itself, besides the nature and inbred bitterness and tartness of particulars, both hard of conceit and harsh of style, and therefore cannot but be unpleasing both to the unskilful and over-musical ear; the one being affected with only a shallow and easy, the other with a smooth and current, disposition."--_Postscript to Hall's Satires_.

[32] In "Venice Preserved," the character of the foolish senator Antonio, now judiciously omitted in the representation was said to be meant for Shaftesbury. But Crowne's "City Politics" contained the most barefaced exhibition of all the popular leaders, including Shaftesbury, College the Protestant joiner, t.i.tus Oates, and Sir William Jones. The last is described under the character of Bartoline, with the same lisping imperfect enunciation which distinguished the original. Let us remark, however, to the honour of Charles II., that in "Sir Courtly Nice," another comedy which Crowne, by his express command, imitated from the Spanish, the furious Tory is ridiculed in the character of Hothead, as well as the fanatical Whig under that of Testimony.

[33] See the Prologues and Epilogues in vol. x.

[34] The concealed partiality of Charles towards Monmouth survived even the discovery of the Rye-house Plot. He could not dissemble his satisfaction upon seeing him after his surrender, and pressed his hand affectionately.--See Monmouth's Diary in _Wellwood's Memorials_, p. 322.

[35] Carte, in his "life of the Duke of Ormond," says, that Monmouth's resolutions varied from submission to resistance against the king, according to his residence with the d.u.c.h.ess at Moor-park, who schooled him to the former, or with his a.s.sociates and partisans in the city, who instigated him to more desperate resolutions.

[36] This Dryden might learn from Mulgrave, who mentions in his Memoirs, as a means of Monmouth's advancement, the "great friendship which the Duke of York had openly professed to his wife, a lady of wit and reputation, who had both the ambition of making her husband considerable, and the address of succeeding in it, by using her interest in so friendly an uncle, whose design I believe was only to convert her.

Whether this familiarity of theirs was contrived or only connived at by the Duke of Monmouth himself, is hard to determine. But I remember, that, after these two princes had become declared enemies, the Duke of York one day told me, with some emotion, as conceiving it a new mark of his nephew's insolence, that he had forbidden his wife to receive any more visits from him; at which I could not help frankly replying, that I, who was not used to excuse him, yet could not hold from doing it in that case, wishing his highness might have no juster cause to complain of him. Upon which the duke, surprised to find me excuse his and my own enemy, changed the discourse immediately."--_Memoirs_, p. 13.

I have perused letters from Sir Gideon Scott of Highchester to the d.u.c.h.ess of Monmouth, recommending a prudent and proper attention to the Duke of York: and this advice she probably followed; for, after her husband's execution, James restored to her all her family estates.

[37] Bought by Mr. Luttrell, 11th April 1683. See it in vol. x. It is expressly levelled against "The Duke of Guise," and generally against Dryden as a court poet. I may, however be wrong in ascribing it to Shadwell.

[38] I observe Anthony Wood, as well as Mr. Malone, suppose Hunt and the Templar a.s.sociated in the Reflections to be the same person. But in the "Vindication of the Duke of Guise" Shadwell and they are spoke of as three distinct persons.

[39] See vol. xvii. In this edition I have retained a specimen of a translation which our author probably executed with peculiar care; selecting it from the account of the barricades of Paris, as ill.u.s.trating the tragedy of "The Duke of Guise."

[40] [This story is told with great variation of figures. Johnson mentions two and three guineas as the old and new prices; others give four and six.--ED.]

[41] Probably alluding to having defended Clarendon in public company; for nothing of the kind occurs in Dryden's publications. [It is not impossible that the New Year's Day Poem (1662) to the Lord Chancellor is partly referred to here.--ED.]

[42] Probably the translation of "_Religio Laici_."

[43] [Some important evidence has come to light since Scott wrote, which shows that the response to Dryden's pet.i.tions and the reward of his services was not so insignificant as appears from the text, though it was meagre enough. The facts were not known fully even to Macaulay, and his ignorance enabled him, in perfect honesty, to make the case against Dryden, for supposed venal apostasy, stronger than it might otherwise appear. The doc.u.ments referred to were discovered by Mr. Peter Cunningham and by Mr. Charles Beville Dryden, the latter of whom communicated his discovery to Mr. Robert Bell. As the facts are undoubted, and Macaulay's ignorance of them equally so, it seems a little remarkable that a reviewer of the little book on Dryden to which I am too often obliged to refer my readers, should have announced his adherence to "Macaulay and fact" rather than "Mr. Bell and sophistry."

It is not obvious how fact can be on the side of a writer who was, owing to no fault of his own, ignorant of the fact, and whose ignorance furnished him with his premises. The state of the case is this. Dryden's application to Hyde produced the following Treasury warrant:--

--of the sume of Fifty pounds for one quarter of the said Annuity or Pencon due at Mid-summer 1680. And by Vertue of his Ma'ts Lres of Privy Scale directing an additionall Annuity of One hundred pounds to him the said John Dryden to draw one or more orders for payment of the sume of Twenty five Pounds for one Quarter of the said Annuity due at Lady day 1680. And let both the said sumes making the sume of Seaventy Five Pounds be satisfyed out of any his Ma'ts Treasure now or hereafter being and remaining in the Receipt of Excheq'r not appropriated to particular uses For w'ch this shal be your Warrant.

Whitehall Treasury Chambers May the 6th 1684

To our very Loving friend S'r Robert Rochester howard Kn't Auditor of the Receipt J Ernle'r of his Ma'ts Excheq'r. Ed Dering Int'r. in officio Auditor Ste: ffox Recpt see-ij Dni Regis Int'r in Oficio Clei Pell &c.

Mr. Dryden 75_l_.

It will be seen from this that independently of the appointment of the laureateship, Dryden had in or before the year 1679 received an additional pension of 100 a year. Confirmatory of this is a Treasury order for the quarter of the same pension, due January 5th, 1679, and a secret service payment of the same year, apparently referring to the same pension. Moreover, on December 17th, 1683, Dryden was appointed collector of customs in the port of London. The value of this is unknown, but the sum of 5 for collecting the duties on cloth, which is the only part of the emoluments as to which there is doc.u.mentary evidence, must have been a very small part of it. Now these two appointments, the laureateship and the collectorship, were by letters-patent, and were, in the usual course, confirmed on the accession of the new Sovereign, though James characteristically cut out the b.u.t.t of sack. But the extra pension, which was merely granted by letters of privy seal, lapsed, and it was absolutely within the discretion of the new Sovereign to continue or discontinue it. It was not formally regranted for a year, and this pension was mistaken by Macaulay for an original one granted in payment of apostasy. That the difference is very considerable must strike every one, and I for one cannot see that the drawing of the obvious inference can be called sophistry. If the time between the lapsing and the regranting seems long, it has to be observed, first, that arrears to the date of the lapse are carefully specified; secondly, that even in the case of the laureateship patent, four whole months, as has been seen, elapsed between the instruction for it and the patent itself. The circ.u.mstances are, of course, consistent with the supposition that apostasy was made a condition of the renewal; but they cannot be said to supply of themselves any argument in favour of such a supposition.--ED.]

SECTION VI.

_Threnodia Augustalis--Albion and Albanius--Dryden becomes a Catholic-- The Controversy of Dryden with Stillingfleet--The Hind and Panther--Life of St. Francis Xavier--Consequences of the Revolution to Dryden--Don Sebastian--King Arthur--Cleomenes--Love Triumphant._

The accession of James II. to the British throne excited new hopes in all orders of men. On the accession of a new prince, the loyal looked to rewards, the rebellious to amnesty. The Catholics exulted in beholding one of their persuasion attain the crown after an interval of two centuries; the Church of England expected the fruits of her unlimited devotion to the royal line; even the sectaries might hope indulgence from a prince whose religion deviated from that established by law as widely as their own. All, therefore, hastened, in sugared addresses, to lament the sun which had set, and hail the beams of that which had arisen. Dryden, among other expectants, chose the more honourable of these themes; and in the "_Threnodia Augustalis_," at once paid a tribute to the memory of the deceased monarch, and decently solicited the attention of his successor. But although he had enjoyed personal marks of the favour of Charles, they were of a nature too unsubstantial to demand a deep tone of sorrow. "Little was the muses' hire, and light their gain;" and "the pension of a prince's praise" is stated to have been all their encouragement. Dryden, therefore, by no means sorrowed as if he had no hope; but, having said all that was decently mournful over the bier of Charles, tuned his lyrics to a sounding close in praise of James.

About the same time, Dryden resumed, with new courage, the opera of "Albion and Albanius," which had been nearly finished before the death of Charles. This was originally designed as a masque, or emblematical prelude to the play of "King Arthur;" for Dryden, wearied with the inefficient patronage of Charles, from whom he only "received fair words," had renounced in despair the task of an epic poem, and had converted one of his themes, that of the tale of Arthur, into the subject of a romantic drama. As the epic was to have been adapted to the honour and praise of Charles and his brother, the opera had originally the same political tendency. "Albion and Albanius" was a sort of introductory masque, in which, under a very thin veil of allegory, first, the restoration of the Stuarts to the throne, and, secondly, their recent conquest over their Whig opponents, were successively represented. The death of Charles made little alteration in this piece: it cost but the addition of an apotheosis; and the opera concluded with the succession of James to the throne, from which he had been so nearly excluded. These topics were however temporary; and, probably from the necessity of producing it while the allusions were fresh and obvious, "Albion and Albanius" was detached from "King Arthur," which was not in such a state of forwardness. Great expense was bestowed in bringing forward this piece, and the scenery seems to have been unusually perfect; particularly, the representation of a celestial phenomenon, actually seen by Captain Gunman of the navy, whose evidence is quoted in the printed copies of the play.[1] The music of "Albion and Albanius"

was arranged by Grabut, a Frenchman, whose name does not stand high as a composer. Yet Dryden pays him some compliments in the preface of the piece, which were considered as derogatory to Purcel and the English school, and gave great offence to a cla.s.s of persons at least as irritable as their brethren the poets. This, among other causes, seems to have injured the success of the piece. But its death-blow was the news of the Duke of Monmouth's invasion, which reached London on Sat.u.r.day, 13th June 1685, while "Albion and Albanius" was performing for the sixth time: the audience broke up in consternation, and the piece was never again repeated.[2] This opera was prejudicial to the company, who were involved by the expense in a considerable debt, and never recovered half the money laid out. Neither was it of service to our poet's reputation, who had, on this occasion, to undergo the gibes of angry musicians, as well as the reproaches of disappointed actors and hostile poets. One went so far as to suggest, with some humour, that probably the laureate and Grabut had mistaken their trade; the forming writing the music, and the latter the verse.

We have now reached a remarkable incident in our author's life, namely, his conversion to the Catholic faith, which took place shortly after the accession of James II. to the British throne. The biographer of Dryden must feel considerable difficulty in discussing the probable causes of his change. Although this essay be intended to contain the life, not the apology of the poet, it is the duty of the writer to place such circ.u.mstances in view, as may qualify the strong prepossession at first excited by a change of faith against the individual who makes it. This prepossession, powerful in every case, becomes doubly so, if the step be taken at a time when the religion adopted seems more readily to pave the way for the temporal prosperity of the proselyte. Even where the grounds of conviction are ample and undeniable, we have a respect for those who suffer, rather than renounce a mistaken faith, when it is discountenanced or persecuted. A brave man will least of all withdraw himself from his ancient standard when the tide of battle beats against it. On the other hand, those who at such a period admit conviction to the better and predominant doctrine, are viewed with hatred by the members of the deserted creed, and with doubt by their new brethren in faith. Many who adopted Christianity in the reign of Constantine were doubtless sincere proselytes, but we do not find that any of them have been canonised. These feelings must be allowed powerfully to affect the mind, when we reflect that Dryden, a servant of the court and zealously attached to the person of James, to whom he looked for the reward of long and faithful service, did not receive any mark of royal favour until he professed himself a member of the religion for which that king was all but an actual martyr. There are other considerations, however, greatly qualifying the conclusions which might be drawn from these suspicious circ.u.mstances, and tending to show, that Dryden's conversion was at least in a great measure effected by sincere conviction. The princ.i.p.al clew to the progress of his religious principles is to be found in the poet's own lines in "The Hind and the Panther," and may, by a very simple commentary, be applied to the state of his religious opinions at different periods of his life:--

"My thoughtless youth was winged with vain desires; My manhood, long misled by wandering fires, Followed false lights, and, when their glimpse was gone, My pride struck out new sparkles of her own.

Such was I, such by nature still I am; Be thine the glory, and be mine the shame!"

The "vain desires" of Dryden's "thoughtless youth" require no explanation: they obviously mean, that inattention to religious duties which the amus.e.m.e.nts of youth too frequently occasion. The "false lights" which bewildered the poet's manhood, were, I doubt not, the puritanical tenets, which, coming into the world under the auspices of his fanatical relations, Sir Gilbert Pickering and Sir John Driden, he must have at least professed, but probably seriously entertained. It must be remembered, that the poet was thirty years of age at the Restoration, so that a considerable s.p.a.ce of his full-grown manhood had pa.s.sed while the rigid doctrines of the fanatics were still the order of the day. But the third state of his opinions, those "sparkles which his pride struck out," after the delusions of puritanism had vanished; in other words, those sentiments which he imbibed after the Restoration, and which immediately preceded his adoption of the Catholic faith, cannot be ascertained without more minute investigation. We may at the outset be easily permitted to a.s.sume, that the adoption of a fixed creed of religious principles was not the first business of our author, when that merry period set him free from the rigorous fetters of fanaticism.

Unless he differed more than we can readily believe from the public feeling at that time, Dryden was satisfied to give to Caesar the things that were Caesar's, without being in a hurry to fulfil the counterpart of the precept. Foremost in the race of pleasure, engaged in labours alien from serious reflection, the favourite of the most lively and dissolute n.o.bility whom England ever saw, religious thoughts were not, at this period, likely to intrude frequently upon his mind, or to be encouraged when they did so. The time, therefore, when Dryden began seriously to compare the doctrines of the contending sects of Christianity, was probably several years after the Restoration, when reiterated disappointment, and satiety of pleasure, prompted his mind to retire within itself, and think upon hereafter. The "_Religio Laici_"

published in 1682, evinces that, previous to composing that poem, the author had bestowed serious consideration upon the important subjects of which it treats: and I have postponed the a.n.a.lysis of it to this place, in order that the reader may be able to form his own conjecture from what faith Dryden changed when he became a Catholic.

The "_Religio Laici_" has indeed a political tendency, being written to defend the Church of England against the sectaries: it is not therefore, so much from the conclusions of the piece, as from the mode of the author's deducing these conclusions, that Dryden's real opinions may he gathered;--as we learn nothing of the bowl's bias from its having reached its mark, though something may be conjectured by observing the course which it described in attaining it. From many minute particulars, I think it almost decisive, that Dryden, when he wrote the "_Religio Laici_," was sceptical concerning revealed religion. I do not mean, that his doubts were of that fixed and permanent nature, which have at different times induced men, of whom better might have been hoped, to p.r.o.nounce themselves freethinkers on principle. On the contrary, Dryden seems to have doubted with such a strong wish to believe, as, accompanied with circ.u.mstances of extrinsic influence, led him finally into the opposite extreme of credulity. His view of the doctrines of Christianity, and of its evidence, were such as could not legitimately found him in the conclusions he draws in favour of the Church of England; and accordingly, in adopting them, he evidently stretches his complaisance towards the national religion, while perhaps in his heart he was even then disposed to think there was no middle course between natural religion and the Church of Rome. The first creed which he examines is that of Deism; which he rejects, because the worship of one sole deity was not known to the philosophers of antiquity, and is therefore obviously to be ascribed to revelation. Revelation thus proved, the puzzling doubt occurs, whether the Scripture, as contended by Calvinists, was to be the sole rule of faith, or whether the rules and traditions of the Church are to be admitted in explanation of the holy text. Here Dryden does not hesitate to point out the inconveniences ensuing from making the sacred page the subject of the dubious and contradictory commentary of the laity at large: when

"The common rule was made the common prey, And at the mercy of the rabble lay; The tender page with h.o.r.n.y fists was galled, And he was gifted most that loudest bawled; The spirit gave the doctoral degree, And every member of a company Was of his trade and of the Bible free."

This was the rule of the sectaries,--of those whose innovations seemed, in the eyes of the Tories, to be again bursting in upon monarchy and episcopacy with the strength of a land-flood. Dryden, therefore, at once, and heartily, reprobates it. But the opposite extreme of admitting the authority of the Church as omnipotent in deciding all matters of faith, he does not give up with the same readiness. The extreme convenience, nay almost necessity, for such authority, is admitted in these remarkable lines:

"Such an omniscient church we _wish_ indeed; _'Twere worth both Testaments, cast in the Creed._"

A wish, so forcibly expressed, shows a strong desire on the part of the poet to be convinced of the existence of what he so ardently desired.

And the argument which Dryden considers as conclusive against the existence of such an omniscient church, is precisely that which a subtle Catholic would find little trouble in repelling. If there be such a church, says Dryden, why does it not point out the corruption of the canon, and restore it where lost? The answer is obvious, providing that the infallibility of the church be previously a.s.sumed; for where can the necessity of restoring or explaining Scripture, if G.o.d has given, to Pope and Council, the inspiration necessary to settle all doubts in matters of faith? Dryden must have perceived where this argument led him, and he rather compounds with the difficulty than faces it. The Scripture, he admits, must be the rule on the one hand; but, on the other, it was to be qualified with the traditions of the earlier ages, and the exposition of learned men. And he concludes, boldly enough:

"Shall I speak plain, and, in a nation free, a.s.sume an honest layman's liberty?

I think, according to my little skill, To my own mother-church submitting still, That many have been saved, and many may, Who never heard this question brought in play.

The unlettered Christian, who believes in gross, Plods on to heaven, and ne'er is at a loss; For the strait gate would be made straiter yet, Were none admitted there but men of wit."

This seems to be a plain admission, that the author was involved in a question from which he saw no very decided mode of extricating himself; and that the best way was to think as little as possible upon the subject. But this was a sorry conclusion for affording firm foundation in religious faith.

Another doubt appears to have puzzled Dryden so much, as to lead him finally to the Catholic faith for its solution. This was the future fate of those who never heard the gospel preached, supposing belief in it essential to salvation: