style resembling those in the Maiden Queen.* They contain much witty and fashionable raillery, and the character of Melantha,† is pronounced by Cibber to exhibit the most complete system of female foppery that could possibly be crowded into the tortured form of a fine lady. It was admirably acted by Mrs. Montfort, afterwards Mrs. Verbruggen. Our author was not so successful in the other piece, 'Love in a Nunnery,' which, by his own confession, was condemned. Ravenscroft, in his prologue to the Careless Lovers, alludes to the unfortunate fate of this play, Ah! how severe your malice was that day, To damn at once the poet and the play. Scott considers that the causes of this failure are not readily to be assigned, and that it is needless to investigate the dislike of an audience who could give no reason for their capricious condemnation. Perhaps the absurd scene in which the prince pretends a fit of the colic had some share in the fate of the piece. To this I should add, that though in the two first acts there is much smart repartee, sparkling wit, and ingenious dialogue, yet there is no variety of incident, change of situation, or progress of action. The love of a father and a son for the same object, must also produce an unpleasing effect upon the mind.§ In the following year, (1673) he produced the ⚫ Cibber combined the comic scenes of these two plays into a Comedy called The Comical Lovers.' 1 See Cibber's Apology, p. 99: from a copy of verses in the Gent. Mag, vol. xv. p. 99, the excellence of the various performers may be learnt, by whom the piece was presented. "What from her lips fantastic Montfort caught, And almost mov'd the thing the poet thought. Or thou, or beauteous Woffington display This was justly ridiculed in the revised edition of the Rehearsal, where Bayes says,-'I remember in a play of mine I set off a scene, i'gad, beyond expectation, only with a petticoat and the belly. ache.' Smith. Aye, but Mr. Bayes, how could you contrive the belly-ache,' &c. Dryden attacked a miserable scribbling plagiarist, called Edward Ravenscroft, in the prologue to this play, as he has less directly done in that of the Marriage- la-Mode. Hence the exquisite pleasure which Ravenscroft received at its failure, as appears in the prologue to his 'Careless Lovers.' Of this gentleman's taste, Scott says, it may be held a satisfactory instance, that he deemed the tragedy of Titus Andronicus too mild and tame, and added some more murders, rapes, and parricides, to make fit for representation; he says, verse, tragedy of Amboyna, which was planned and written in a month. It is in prose and blank and was composed, the author says, to inflame the nation against the Dutch, with whom we were then at war. Even the most impartial and generous of critics has pronounced this play beneath criticism, and the very worst that our poet ever wrote. In his Essay on Dramatic Poesy,* and in his epilogue to the Conquest of Granada, Dryden had pointed out the faults of the elder dramatists with less gentleness and reverence than was esteemed due to their great and established reputation. He also claimed the superiority of the plays of his own age, and of the heroic drama over those of the times of Elizabeth and James. He censures the antiquated language, the defective plots, the irregular action of Shakspeare and Fletcher; and points his strongest arguments against the inelegant language and the low characters of Jonson. These he disadvantageously contrasts with the productions of a theatre revived under the auspices of a gallant monarch and a fashionable court, where the solidity of English sense is united to the sportive raillery, the lightness, the ease, and the gayety of the French Drama. Scott thinks that Like other poets, he'll not proudly scorn To own, but that he winnow'd Shakspeare's corn; So far was he from robbing him of's treasure, That he did add his own, to make full measure. • This bold epilogue gave much offence, on account of the censure which it threw on the fathers of the stage. Rochester, among others, severely assailed it. Scott has observed how much the character and style of Shakspeare's and Dryden's dramas were influenced by the manners of the respective ages in which they lived, and the different audiences to whom they were addressed. The poor small theatres in which Shakspeare's and Jonson's plays were represented were filled with spectators, who though of the middle rank were probably worse educated than our more vulgar;' but they came prepared with a tribute of tears, and laughter to bursts of passion or effusions of wit, though incapable of estimating the beauties derived from the gradual development of a story, well maintained characters, well arranged incidents, and the minute beauties of language. Dryden, on the other hand, wrote what was to pass before the judgment of a monarch and his courtiers, professed judges of dramatic criticism, and a formidable band of town critics; art therefore was not only a requisite qualification, but the principal attribute of the dramatic poet. An exhibition of nature, in the strength of her wildest energies, as in Lear and Othello; deep emotion, or sweet and simple pathos, would have found no correspondent feeling in the bosoms of the selfish, the witty, the affected, and the critical audience, who preferred the ingenious, romantic, and polished. Scott questions whether the age of Charles II. would have borne the introduction of Othello and Falstaff. The editor of Corneille boasts that the French poet, with all the genius of Shakspeare, had a more refined and gentlemanly feeling-Ce qu'un Seigneur est à l'égard d'un homme de peuple. + Scott's Life of Dryden, p. 152. Dryden, perhaps from the rigour of a puritanical education, had not studied the old dramatic models in his youth, and had only begun to read them with attention when it was his object rather to depreciate than to emulate them; but the time came when he did due homage to their genius. Those who hated Dryden's talents, and envied his success, the old critics and the rival playwrights, took this opportunity, under pretence of advocating the injured cause of the ancients, of attacking the productions of Dryden's muse; and as the style of controversy in that age was virulent and rude, they passed from a criticism on his writings to reflections on his character. Literary contest,' as his biographer observes, was embittered by personal hatred, and truth was so far from being the object of the combatants, that even victory was tasteless unless obtained by the disgrace or degradation of an opponent.'* Matthew Clifford, one of the contributors to the Rehearsal, printed his Notes on Dryden's poems in four letters, together with some reflections on the Hind and Panther by T. Brown, in 1687. It is probable that for some years previously they had been circulated in clubs and literary coffee-houses by numerous transcripts. They chiefly consist of a rude clumsy banter mixed up with minute and verbal criticism. Another pamphlet that appeared was 'the censure of the Rota on Mr. Dryden's Conquest of Granada,' printed at Oxford 1673. This was followed by a Description of the academy of Athenian Virtuosi, with a discourse held there in vindication of Mr. Dryden's Conquest of Granada against the author of the censure of the Rota,' and a third, called A Friendly Vindication of Mr. Dryden from the author of the censure of the Rota,' this was printed at Cambridge. The two former were written by Richard Leigh, of Queen's College, Oxford, afterwards a player in the Duke's company: but not the celebrated comedian of that name. The third is written in the same taste, but by a different hand. Dryden is accused, probably without truth, of exhibiting in his dramatic characters the portraits of living persons. In Charles Blount, our poets found an admirer of his genius and vindicator of his fame; and in his own address to Sedley, he notices these attacks with the contempt which they deserved. Edward Ravenscroft, who constructed a slender and temporary reputation by altering the plays of Shakspeare, and imitating those of Molière, threw out some sneers against the heroic drama, and particularly the Conquest of Granada. * Scott's Life of Dryden, p. 153. b Dryden retorted in a prologue to the Assignation, and an epilogue to the Marriage-â-laMode, and the degrading controversy closed by some lines which his antagonist wrote on the bad success of the Assignation.' In 1674, Dryden published his State of Innocence, * a play adapted from Milton's Paradise Lost, but not intended for stage exhibition. Aubrey has told us but too briefly some circumstances attending it, which have been copied into most of the biographies of the poet : and yet familiar as the anecdote is, the meeting between two of our greatest poets, the one in the calm serenity and satisfaction of declining life, the other full of youthful hopes, and high in fame, is too interesting to be altogether omitted. Dryden, it appears, waited on the blind bard, with whom, it may be presumed, he was on friendly terms, and previous to entering on his task, asked his permission to put his great poem into rhyme.- Ay,' said Milton, 'you may tag my verses if you will.' Dennis says, that Dryden at that time knew not half the extent of Milton's excellence, as more than twenty years after he confessed to him, and is pretty plain from his writing The State of Innocence.'t We may add that Milton also was imperfectly acquainted with Dryden's powers, and could little have anticipated the future splendour of his fame. As Scott observes, that the costume of our first parents must have rendered this play unfit for the stage, it is not easy to conjecture the motives which led Dryden to form the epic of Milton into a drama. At the same time it must be observed, that the stage directions are minute and particular, more so than would be at all necessary in a poem intended for perusal. I can only escape from the difficulty of this dilemma, by supposing that accuracy and propriety of dress was no more required by the audi Langbaine remarks on the dedication of this play to the Dutchess of York, whether the author has not been guilty of the highest flattery, I leave there are some expressions in it that seem strainto the reader's judgment, but I may presume to say ed, and a note beyond Ela,' as for instance, 'your person is so admirable that it can scarce receive addition, when it shall be glorified; and your soul, which shines throughout, finds it of a substance so near her own, that she will be pleased to pass an age within it, and to be confined to such a palace.'-Dram. Poets, p. 172. This is high-flown nonsense certainly, but it was addressed to the most dazzling and radiant beauty that ever sate on the British throne, and Dryden had so long been accustomed to extravagant expressions, that he was not aware of their real force. + Mr. Dennis's Letters moral and critical, vol. i., p. 75, 8vo. 1721. In a French play, 'The Mort d'Abel of Legouve,' partly taken from Gesner, which was often acted; Adam and Eve appeared on the stage dressed ac ence, or attended to by the players at that time, than consistency of language and character was maintained by the poet; and that without shocking probability, Adam might have sate in the primeval bower, formed of cut yew trees and rosemary, in a Steinkirck cravat and Chadreux peruke; while Eve conversed with the serpent (himself perhaps dressed in a herald's coat) with a hoop petticoat, a falbala, and a fan. Of the execution of this performance, I know not what to say, but that all who can estimate the greatness of Milton's images, the simplicity, the majesty, the richness of his language, the exquisite propriety of his thoughts, the fine ideal of his characters, Dryden's distorted reflection of it must appear very grotesque and ridiculous; in many parts puerile and weak; in all, losing sight of the exalted strains of poetry, and the noble conception of the original. That great creation of Milton's genius, the character of Satan, the angel of sorrow is sullied or lost. All his majestic lineaments disappear, the eye of pride, the lurid brow of wo, the greatness of his scorn, the conscious dignity of his demeanour, the feelings of one who had stood before the throne of light, (himself the morning star of heaven) all are destroyed; while only the impish cunning, the wicked, malignant, fiendish joy of the satyr and the demon is left. The simplicity of Eve is impaired, and even her purity and innocence stained; cording to the most exact imitation of that state in which they may be supposed to have lived, when they left the bowers of Eden. Act ii. sc. 2. 'Scene Paradise.' Trees cut out on each side, with several fruits upon them, a fountain in the midst, at the far end, the prospect terminates in a walk. Eve enters and utters the following lines among others. Like myself, I see nothing: from each tree, Dr. Warton has contrasted the majestic character of Satan in Milton, with the grotesque figure drawn by Dante, with his three heads and leathern wings. This is not, he says, the figure of an archangel fallen. The Satan in the Davideis disgraces Cowley. Warton's Dryden, ii. p. 310. Tasso has followed the grosser conceptions of the elder Italian poets; I have thought that they both drew from their early painters; even M. Angelo in this respect was not in advance of his brethren, though he brought to painting the sensibilities and powers of a poet. In a pamphlet I have quoted before, 'Reason of Mr. Bayes for changing his Religion,' there is much amusing banter on the subject of Eve in Dryden's play, discoursing of flames, darts, transports, the performances of lovers, and the fatality of matrimony for Adam, I made him as well acquainted with all the arguments of the supralapsarians, as a justice's clerk is with all the she traders in his master's dominions. So that when the archangel while the behaviour of Adam to his angel guest, and his pertinacious arguments on the doctrines of liberty and necessity, which it took two angels with the assistance of old Hobbes to answer, is in strong and humiliating contrast with the exquisite truth, the delicacy, and propriety of Milton's picture. A great want of taste is also discovered, in uniting the ornamented and figurative diction of Milton, with his own meaner and more colloquial language, and even sometimes in making it the vehicle of political satire. One of his critics told him, that he had heard of anchovies dissolved in sauce, but never of angels dissolved in Hallelujahs.' Michael came to pay him a visit at his summerhouse, he presently engages him before the second course is removed in the controversy about Freewill; professes mediums, silences objections, tells his guest that his major was open enough to let a whole shoal of Arminians in at the breaches; that his minor would not hold water,' &c. Act iii. sc. 1. Eve says to Adam, A doubtful trembling seized me first all o'er, Then wishes and a warmth unknown before: What followed was all ecstasy and trance, Immortal pleasures round my swimining eyes did dance. And speechless joys, in whose sweet tumults tost, I thought my breath and my new being lost. Upon hearing which, Lucifer says, Why have not I, like these, a body too, In the same scene, Eve is supposed, in a dream, to see the future temptation. It is thus described Angel. Behold what a change on a sudden is here, How glorious in beauty, how bright they appear, From spirits deformed they are deities made, Their pinions at pleasure, the clouds can invade, Till equal in honour they rise With him who commands in the skies, Then taste without fear, and be happy and wise. Woman. Oh! now I believe! such pleasure I find LIFE OF DRYDEN. Dryden had now the leisure of two years for the composition of Aurengzebe, his last tragedy, which was exhibited in the spring of 1675. It was his last heroic tragedy. He confessed that he had grown weary of his old mistress rhyrne, and he discovered at length that nature and passion were not so to be constrained. Passions too fierce to be in fetters bound, And nature flies her like enchanted ground. The manuscript was perused by Charles, before it received the author's last hand, and (oh! most considerable courtly confession!) the event in it was modelled by his royal pleasure; which is something better than his royal taste.' Should this play be considered as a model of the heroic style, the character, sentiments, and language of the Queen Nourmahal will be sufficient to place it on a very low level in point of delicacy of taste and soundness of judgment. The last speech of the queen is probably the most exalted specimen of absurdity, hyperbole, and extravagance, that was ever conceived.* Could Dryden intend it as a satire on his own style, and ungratefully ridicule the antiquated beauty whom he had so long worshipped, but whose faded and too familiar charms he was going to desert? In it is his last farewell to his once admired model, the rhyming heroic tragedy, and in this speech the character was well preserved to the last.f I must now for a moment divert the current of Dr. Johnson's supposition, that in assuming for his subject a living prince Dryden incurred some risk: as should Aurengzebe have learnt and resented our freedom, and that he was figuring on the boards of Drury Lane, our Indian trade was exposed to the consequences of his displeasure.' for tunately was not verified. Sir W. Scott considers that the last descendant of Timor, the Emperor of India, the Ornament of the throne, might not hear of his degradation; or if he did, whether he would have cared about it. The beauties of Aurengzebe, says Scott, will be found to consist in strains of didactic morality or solemn meditation. The passage descriptive of life has been praised by all the critics down to Dr. Johnson. There is much less of ornate structure and emphatic swell than occurs in the speeches of Almanzor and Maximian. It is amusing to see the anxiety with which Dryden justifies the hazardous experiment of ascribing to emperors and princesses the language of nature and passion. Davies, in his Dramatic Miscellanies says, that Dryden's last and most perfect rhyming tragedy was Aurengzebe. In this play, the passions are strongly depicted, the Characters well discriminated, and the diction more miliar and dramatic than in any of his preceding pieces. Vol. 1. p. 157. I must observe that all observations on the advantage or defects of rhyme are confined strictly to the English language. There is no reasoning from the Italian or the French to the English about rhyme or blank verse. One language, says Johnson, cannot communicate its rules to another. the dramatic narrative, shortly to detail the un- Elkanah Settle had the misfortune to be rais- The play was decorated with engravings ;* the price of it was advanced to two shillings; and Settle assumed the title which belonged by right to Dryden, of Servant: to his Majesty. Dryden could not patiently digest this triumph of a fool; he ought to have held in his spleen, and waited for the passions of the town to cool; but his anger and provocation were great, and in conjunction with Shadwell and Crowne, he printed his remarks on the Empress. of Morocco. Settle answered it, and left his antagonist covered with the dust and dirt of a degrading and injudicious controversy.† No sooner had Rochester placed Settle on the pedestal of fame, than he was anxious to dethrone him; to effect this he persuaded Crowne to write the mask of Calisto, which was acted in 1675 by the ladies at court, who were most distinguished for their rank and • See 'The Art of Poetry.' Nay 'tis a wonder if in his dire rage He prints not his dull follies for the stage, And in the front of all his senseless plays Makes David Loggan crown his head with bays." Loggan was the engraver. Scott thinks that these lines are Dryden's. See vol. xv. p. 244. The frontispiece to the play was curious, as exhibiting the fasade of the theatre in Dorset Gardens. ↑ See Scott's ed. vol. xv. p. 398. For an amusing extract from the fustian and nonsense of this play of Settle's,see Scott's Life of Dryden, p. 183. Drydenhas drawn so nice a distinction between his plays and Settle's when he says 'His were good sense, that looked like nonsense; Settle's nonsense, which yet looked very like sense,' that we must suppose that there was not much difference between them. * beauty. It had a run of thirty nights; was of course got up with all becoming splendour of decoration, and Dryden suffered a further mortification in having his epilogue to it refused, which was intended to have been spoken by the Lady Henrietta Wentworth; then young, and beautiful, and innocent-afterwards the adored, the unfortunate, alas! the guilty mistress of the Duke of Monmouth. Crowne's reign of glory, however, was as short as that of his predecessor, and Rochester now recommended Otway to the royal protection. Don Carlos appeared in 1676; in his prefacef he owned his obligations to Rochester, who soon after lampooned him; and he spoke disparagingly of Dryden, who really saw, and more than once confessed in what the strength of Otway's genius consisted. In an anonymous satire, which appeared in 1678, called An Allusion to the tenth Satire of Horace,' Rochester again assailed Dryden's reputation. Dryden alludes to it in the Preface to his All for Love. To account for this bitter system of persecution, it is necessary to recollect that Mulgrave's Essay on Satire was submitted to Dryden's correction. Though written in 1675, it was not made public till 1679. It was peculiarly severe on Rochester, accused him of cowardice, and openly denounced the profligacy of his life. Rochester thought, or pretended to think, that Dryden was the author, and he meditated a species of revenge more Calisto, by Lady Mary, afterwards Queen. Psicas. Lady Mary Mordaunt. Mercury. Mrs. Sarah Jennings, afterwards Attendant nymphs-Countess of Pembroke, Lady Catharine Herbert, Mrs. Fitzgerald. Mrs. Fraser. ↑ A certain writer that shall be nameless (but you may guess at him by what follows) being asked his opinion of this play, very gravely cocked and cried, Igad, he knew not a line in it he would be author of; but he is a fine facetious person, as my friend Sir Formal has it, and to be even with him, I know a comedy of his that has not so much as a quibble in it, which I would be author of.' Pref. to Don Carlos. Don Carlos went off with great applause, while The Orphan, a somewhat better performance, and what is yet more strange, Venice Preserved, met with a very cold reception. See Armstrong's Miscellan. 1. p. 137. Though prais'd and punish'd for another's rhymes, His own deserve as much applause sometimes. This egregiously impudent effusion applied by Sheffield to Dryden, Pope erased; and no doubt with due indignation. Ishall here mention that the "Art of Poetry,' by Sir William Soame, is published in Dryden's Works, on the authority of J. Tonson; and that Scott says, a great part of the poem bears marks of Dryden's polishing hand, and some entire passages show at once his taste in criticisms, principles, and prejudices.' ferocious than the pen could give. On the night of the 18th of December, 1679, Dryden was way-laid by hired ruffians and severely beaten, as he passed through Rose Street, Covent Garden, on his return from Wills's Coffee House to Gerrard Street; a reward of 501. and a promise of pardon was in vain offered in the London Gazette and other papers, for the discovery of the perpetrators; but Rochester and the Dutchess of Portsmouth were universally considered as the secret promoters of the outrage. This Rose-alley ambuscade became, it appears, proverbial, under the name of a Dryden Salutation.' In 1678, the tragedy of All for Love and the Comedy of Limberham were printed. With regard to the former play, Dryden said it was the only one which he wrote for himself, the rest were given to the people.' This play was founded on the Antony and Cleopatra of Shakspeare; but the plays of our great bard, after the restoration, were not popular. Jonson stood unrivalled in public estimation; and, it is said, that we are mainly indebted to Dryden for bringing the public to a better and higher taste. In his preface he speaks of Shakspeare in such language of praise as could scarcely be heightened. As one who, without learning, should by the force of his own genius perform so much, that, in a manner, he left no praise for any who came after him. He speaks of the pleasure he would have had, had opportunity been convenient, of drawing a parallel between him and Fletcher, and how far they were to be imitated; and, at length, he says, 'I hope I may affirm, and without vanity, that by imitating him, I have excelled myself in this play, and particularly that I prefer the scene between Antony and Ventidius to any thing which I have written of this kind. When Dryden had broken loose from the bondage of his artificial drama,† if he did not spring In a letter of Rochester to H. Saville, 20th of Nov. 1692. 'You write me word that I am out of favour with a certain poet, whom I have admired for the disproportion of him and his attributes. He is a rarity which I cannot but be fond of, as one would be of a boy that could fiddle, or a singing owl. If he falls on me at the blunt, which is his very good weapon in wit, I will forgive him if you please, and leave the repartee to black Will with a cudgel. In the country, Lord Rochester lived a blameless life, but he used to say, when he came to Brentford, the Devil entered into him, and never left him till he returned to the country.' According to the opinion of Walter Harte, who had studied Dryden's works with great dili gence, he settled his principles of versification in 1676, when he produced the play of Aurengzebe and, according to his own account, of the short time in which he wrote Tyrannic Love, and the State of Innocence, he soon obtained the full |