essay type questions on elizabethan drama

Elizabethan Theatre and Drama

The simple definition of Elizabethan theatre and drama is that it is drama written during the reign of Elizabeth I, but that is absurdly simplistic: Elizabethan drama is much more than that.

Queen Elizabeth I of England and Ireland reigned from 1558 to 1603, during the time when Europeans were starting to break out of the cultural constraints imposed by the medieval Church. Great thinkers across Europe were courageously directing their eyes away from the face of God and turning them towards the mind, the form and the ideas of human beings in a huge humanistic movement. Instead of just accepting the flat, two dimensional assumptions about life, God, the planet and the universe itself that the Church pedalled, they were challenging those assumptions. This led to a blossoming of new perceptions in every area of human endeavour – art, music, architecture, religion, science, philosophy, theatre and literature. Artists, composers, scientists and writers looked back beyond the darkness of fourteen centuries and took their inspiration from the humanist qualities in Greco-Roman culture.

An Elizabethan theatre – home to Elizabethan drama

The Renaissance flowered right across Europe but had different emphases in the different European cultures – it was religion and philosophy in Germany, for example; art, architecture and sculpture in Italy. And in England, it was Elizabethan theatre drama. All through the Middle Ages English drama had been religious and didactic. When Elizabeth came to the throne most of the plays on offer to the public were Miracle Plays, presenting in crude dialogue stories from the Bible and lives of the saints, and the Moralities, which taught lessons for the guidance of life through the means of allegorical action. They were primarily dramas about God, not about people.

By the time Elizabeth’s reign ended there were over twenty theatres in London , all turning over several plays a week – plays that were secular in their nature, and about people. That represented a complete revolution in theatre, and makes Elizabethan theatre distinct. What changed at that time was that the theatre became a place where people went to see, not dramatised lectures on good behaviour, but a reflection of their own spirit and day-to-day interests. They wanted to laugh and to cry – to be moved, not by divine reflection, but by human beings doing good and bad things just as they did – loving and murdering, stealing, cheating, acting sacrificially, getting into trouble and behaving nobly: in short, being human like themselves.

This new Elizabethan theatre scene attracted writers of great calibre who thought of themselves simply as craftsmen – in the same way as coopers or wheelwrights did, and not ‘great writers,’ as we think of them today. But even so, most of the theatre writers of Elizabethan England have not been equalled during the four centuries since that time. There was a lot of money to be made feeding this huge new appetite for plays, and good playwrights who played their cards well and made good contacts – as Shakespeare did – became rich.

So when we look back at Elizabethan drama from the twenty-first century what do we see? We see, for the first time, stage presentations of the human experience. We see acts of great nobility by flawed heroes – a great theme of Greek tragedy – perfected by Shakespeare in such plays as Hamlet , Macbeth , King Lear etc. We see human beings at their meanest level; we see psychological studies of the human character, such as the psychopathic Iago in Othello ; we see the exploration of the deepest human emotions, such as love in Romeo and Juliet and Antony and Cleopatra . Although most of the plays of the Elizabethan period have an underlying Christian assumption, because of the culture of the time in which they were written they are essentially humanist – in tune with the Renaissance spirit of the time.

In Elizabethan drama, because it is about people rather than God, we see a lot of humour. Again, modelled on the Greek comedies, the humour is perfected by the likes of Shakespeare and Ben Jonson with their memorable comic characters and their satirical look at their own time, as well as light-hearted social comedies. In Shakespeare’s plays there is humour even in the darkest plays, such as the frequent ‘laugh’ lines in Hamlet . Shakespeare more or less invented a form of drama that mixed all genres, so that his tragedies contain comic elements, his comedies tragic elements, and his histories contain both. In Shakespeare’s case the winds of Renaissance gave him the freedom to reflect all aspects of human beings in his plays, and he wrote plays that have not only lasted for four hundred years but which have very rarely (if at all) been bettered during that time.

Towards the end of Elizabeth’s reign playwrights were developing new themes and techniques which led to the distinctive Jacobean theatre with its more crusty, violent plays that focused on the human being’s capacity for selfishness, dramatised in in-depth representations of ambition and its effects.

What do you think of this Elizabethan theatre article – anything to add? Please join in the conversation in the comments below!

• WhatsApp 33
• Pinterest 0

that,s truely amazingly explained..!

your opinion is invalid

ur opnion is invalid too.

Muhammed Hassan? what are u doing? ur the one in sl rght sir?

as modern people, we need to appreciate such masterpieces, to value the culture heritage.

help it’s 5 am but this is a rlly good article so yee

loved this article! showing my uncle it right now at the dinner table.

i love shakespeare plays with boys and makeup

Leave a Reply

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Elizabethan Drama in English Literature: Characteristics, Themes & Dramatists

Back to: History of English Literature All Ages – Summary & Notes

Table of Contents

Introduction

Its popularity matched that of 5th Century Greece. The Elizabethan Age is often extended till 1642 when the theatres were closed under the Puritanical revival.

Characteristics

Elizabethan society.

The new Elizabethan introduced a hero who was not ascertained of his fate and was full of doubts and passions that catapulted drama as the favourite pass time for many.

This was the spark that ignited the passion that led to Charlotte Marlowe, Ben Jonson and Shakespeare and his famous “The Globe” in the future. This age is also known for experimentation leading to new discoveries which provided rich content for drama, poetry and prose.

The use of theology, geography and science provided a new dimension to the literature of the time. However, with the crowing of James, I content became a tool for the glorification of absolute royal power.

There were political considerations as well as uncontrolled large crowds that encouraged immoral behaviour with the coming of the Puritan age theatre was resigned to private homes and public houses until its revival by Charles II in 1660.

Elizabethan Theatre Facts

Renaissance Period influenced many properties of the theatre like actors were attached to companies that performed throughout the country. They enjoyed aristocratic patronage and survived the lean winter months easily on such appreciation.

The performances were held in the open like the public courtyards, inns etc with lavish entrances behind them and windows. Spaces were craftily used to create the scenes of heaven and hell etc.

Specifically constructed theatres were still not available. The facial features, body language and more garments of an actor were cleverly manipulated to establish drama in his/her personality.

There were many features of Elizabethan theatre that were violative of the ghost-like sanctity of godliness with Transvestism being quite popular (men dressed up as women on stage, a Biblical sin).

3 Forms of Drama

With Shakespeare’s “ The Comedy of Errors ” and “ Taming of the Shrew “, humour became farcical. The superficiality of Court comedies like “ Midsummer Night’s Dream ” was another highlight of the age.

Elizabethan Drama Themes

Dramatic devices.

Several devices were used to instil a level of awe and intrigue in the drama. Asides or private conversations and soliloquies are used to engage with the audience and became quite popular.

Likes of ‘ ungrateful fox’ or ‘a plague-sore’  are plastered all over his plays. Clever wordplay and puns were employed like in Romeo and Juliet to incite a level of layering to the characters.

ElizabethanDrama.org

Making elizabethan plays understandable and fun to read, this website is dedicated to rescuing and presenting for the first time ever easy-to-read, fully annotated elizabethan plays. my hope is that some of you will be inspired to try to read some of these great plays..

From the moment Christopher Marlowe electrified audiences in 1586 with his monumental drama Tamburlaine the Great to the closing of the London theaters in 1642 (thanks to a wave of Puritanism sweeping England), London theater-goers were treated to a seemingly never-ending succession of brilliant tragedies, histories and comedies written by some of England’s most famous dramatists, including John Lyly , George Peele , Robert Greene ,  Philip Massinger and John Ford , as well as that other well-known poet, William Shakespeare.

Indeed, though most people only think of Shakespeare when they think of Elizabethan drama, Shakespeare wrote only 37 plays (a couple in collaboration) that we know of; happily, more than 600 plays from this era survive.  This means that, for those who savor the potential exquisiteness of the English language, our ancient dramas can be the source of a lifetime worth of reading enjoyment.

What’s So Good About This Website?

The plays on this site, however, have been edited and annotated for the modern audience. The annotations provide not only meanings for archaic words, but also paraphrases and commentary on characters and situations, explanations of mythical allusions, and fascinating notes on historical and cultural references, all with the goal of making the plays UNDERSTANDABLE and SATISFYING to read, and to make you as knowledgeable as any patron who sat in the theater in the late 16th and early 17th century.

The plays on Elizabethandrama.org  contain several unique features:

(1) Our plays are the only ones in the  world where the annotations appear next to the lines they are interpreting, allowing for a smooth and enjoyable reading experience. The annotations for plays on other websites, if you can find them, are identified by icons which you must constantly click if you wish to see the commentary. Footnotes for plays in books must be searched at the bottom of the page. Either way, the reading of the lines is disrupted, and frankly makes reading the plays a chore.

(2) We have begun the process of providing script vers ions of each of our plays. Our goal is to provide accessible, free scripts of the greatest plays of the Elizabethan era and beyond, in the hopes that these plays will be produced and performed more often than ever before – well, at least since the 17th century! All the scripts contain line numbers.

Additionally, directors and performers can read the annotated versions of the plays even as they are preparing production, so that they will have greater insight to their characters than any actors or actresses have had for over three centuries!

(3) The plays on this website are available for free .

Defining Elizabethan Drama

Technically, the “Elizabethan era” lasted only so long as Queen Elizabeth I reigned over England, which was from 1558 to 1603; however, for purposes of this website, Elizabethan Drama also includes the plays written after 1603, during the reigns of both James I (reigned 1603-1625) and Charles I (reigned 1625-1649), all the way to the closing of the theaters in 1642. It may be more accurate to refer to this literature as English Tudor and Renaissance drama, but I do not think any harm will result from considering it all by the name that comes to most people’s minds when they think about the plays of this era.

Reading ancient literature has been my hobby for two decades. Reading Elizabethan drama has been my hobby for the last 15 years. I spent several years creating (for my own use) a fully annotated set of most of Shakespeare’s plays, creating a master copy in which I incorporated the notes, glosses and annotations of the plays from multiple sources. I have also read through and taken notes on over 250 plays of the period, spending as much time absorbing the information contained in the footnotes as reading the text of the plays themselves. From this background grew a desire to share my passion and acquired skill in interpreting these plays with anyone interested enough to seek out them out on the internet. It was in 2016 that this project was conceived, and ElizabethanDrama.org was born.

Other Resources for Plays of the Era

It is surprising how few websites there are which present modern, readable versions of Elizabethan drama (outside of Shakespeare’s plays, of course). Even fewer websites – only three (other than this one) – offer annotated plays for their readers. My goal is to fill that gap with as many annotated plays as possible during my lifetime.

The three websites containing annotated Elizabethan plays are as follows:

• Thirteen of Shakespeare’s plays can be found at shakespeare-navigators.com , edited by Philip Weller (who unfortunately passed away in 2021) . I believe this is the only site other than ours in which the annotations appear next to the lines. An additional feature of Mr. Weller’s site is that many of the footnotes link to illustrations.
• Many of Thomas Middleton’s plays can be viewed online, thanks to the work of Chris Cleary, at tech.org/~cleary/middhome.html .
• The full collection of edited and annotated plays of Richard Brome is available at  Richard Brome Online .
• You can find a number of carefully edited and annotated plays by the great Restoration playwright John Dryden at DivineDotComedy.org , which is managed by 21st century Renaissance man Jacob Rabinowitz. Jacob’s site provides literary treats of all sorts, including his own translation of Dante’s Purgatorio and Paradiso .

Many of you will be interested to learn more about meter and rhythm in Elizabethan poetry. You are strongly recommended to visit a website which focuses extensively on the intricacies of meter: versemeter.wordpress.com . The blog is written by Mr. Keir Fabian, a true specialist, and a friend to this website.

Elizabethan Theatre & Drama | Elizabethan Drama Summary & Analysis

Table of Contents

Introduction

  The Elizabethan age was the golden age of English drama. Elizabethan Drama is written and performed publicly in England throughout the reign of Queen Elizabeth. It started in 1550 and end in 1620. Elizabeth queen of England inspired all of England’s people with unbounded patriotism. Under her administration, English Literature reached the very highest point of its development.

Predecessor Of Elizabethan Drama

 In the Elizabethan age, the scholars of University wits were known as predecessors of Elizabethan drama. The term University wits refer to a group of young dramatist of the Early Elizabethan period, who were associated with the universities of Cambridge and Oxford. They are:

Christopher Marlowe

• Thomas Lodge
• Thomas Nasche
• Rebert Green
• George Peel

Themes of Elizabethan Drama

a) Anti – Semitism b) Revenge Tragedy c) Supernatural Elements d) Comedy of Humours

a) Anti- Semitism: – Among the popular themes was Anti-Semitism in Elizabethan society which is reflected in the plays Christopher Marlowe’s The Jew of Malta and Wiliam Shakespeare” The Merchant of Venice.

b) Revenge Tragedy: – Revenge was another popular theme Be it a ghost-like in Thomas Kyd’s “The Spanish Tragedy” or a prince in Shakespeare’s Hamlet The motive of revenge became the main counter-motive in drama, especially tragedies.

c) Supernatural Element: – Another theme that was prominent was the supernatural as the society of the time was highly superstitious with people believing in supernatural forms. Ghosts became the prime moving force in many tragedies.

d) Comedy of humours: – use of psychology was extensive and was founded on the theory of humor inside a human body, namely, blood, phlegm, black bile, and yellow bile Ben Jon’s Every man is his humor is the best example of comedy of humor.

Dramatic Devices in Elizabethan Drama

Asides or private conversations and soliloquies are used to engage with the audience and have become quite popular.

lambic Pentameter with five two-syllable units or ‘feet was the most popular construction of the age Blank verse with iambic pentameter was the most popular construction of the age.

Blank verse with iambic pentameter was also used profusely in Elizabethan plays.

Dramatist of Elizbethan Era

Some of the most important dramatists come from Elizabethan Era, including:

William Shakespeare

Ben johnson.

            The first greatest dramatist of the time Queen Elizabethan Era was Christopher Marlowe. Though he lived a short life he wrote some powerful tragedies, which are counted among the great works of the English stage. His first tragedy Tamburlaine is written in Blank Verse with colorful images of power and violence.

            Marlowe ‘ Dr. Faustus is based on the well-known story of a man (Faustus) who sold his soul to the devil in order to power and riches in life. In the next play, The Jew of Malta a rich Jew refuses to pay taxes to the governor of Malta so his property is taken from him, and in revenge, he begins a life of Violence. Edward the Second is probably Marlowe’s best play. It is comparable to Shakespeare’s best historical plays.

             William Shakespeare is taken as the finest dramatist of all time. He began his career as a play actor and then moved to playwriting. He had great dramatic as well as poetic gifts. His plays look like a living world of people. His characters have both individual and universal qualities.

            In the beginning, Shakespeare wrote historical plays. In all his historical plays he provides social commentary. Some of Shakespeare’s historical plays are – Richard The Second, Richard the Third, King Henry the Fourth, Fifth, and sixth.

            Shakespeare also wrote a good number of comedies. They are better than his historical plays. Among his famous comedies are – A Midsummer Night’s Dream, The Merchant Of Venice, Twelfth Night, and As you Like it.

            William Shakespeare also wrote tragedies. His four great tragedies are- Hamlet, King Lear, Macbeth, and Othello.

            The central character in these tragedies are always great men like – King, Queen, Price, and so on.

            Ben Johnson is one of the greatest dramatists of the Elizabethan age. His plays are less beautiful and less attractive than Shakespeare’s.  He believes in three unities, which are the unities of place, time, and action. The ancient writer influenced much of Johnson’s Ideas.

            Everman in His Humour is his famous play. Johnson wrote approximately 20 plays alone with other playwrights. Among his comedies – Valpone, The Silent Woman, and The Alchemist are world-famous.

            So, now we can say that, In the development of English Literature, Elizabethan Drama and their dramatist have played a very important role.

Are you struggling to keep up with your English Literature Coursework? Do you need detailed, customized notes to help you better understand the texts you’re studying?  “Look no further! Our customized paid notes will help you achieve your study goals quickly.

– Varsha Singh

Related Posts

War Poetry In English Literature | Fight during World War 1st | War Poets

I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings Summary & Analysis | I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings Poem Explanation

French Borrowing Words & French Loan Words | French loan Words In English Literature

New Criticism in literature | 20th Century Criticism | Modern Criticism

4 thoughts on “elizabethan theatre & drama | elizabethan drama summary & analysis”.

Always in love with your content

Plz send me pdf of this notes

Excellent information 👍

Thank Your for appreciating my content

Comments are closed.

• Annotated Bibliography
• Argumentative
• Book Reviews
• Case Studies
• Communication and Media
• Computer Technologies
• Consideration
• Environment
• Explanation
• Informative
• Personal Experience
• Research Proposals

Queen Elizabethan Drama

Introduction

The Elizabethan drama refers to different plays that were produced from 1558 to 1603 while Queen Elizabeth reigned in England (Berber 165). Elizabethan drama did not concentrate only religious themes. It also concentrated on secular issues. Berber points out that this diversity has since led to more public turn out for the events which has enabled the opening of several playhouses and “The most famous Globe Theater in 1599” (Berber 165). Although Shakespeare was the most prolific of the Elizabethan dramatists.  Christopher Marlowe was also among the play writers during the period (Berber 165). This essay examines the biography of Christopher Marlowe including the basic information about his life, define the characteristics of his work, and influence or lasting importance the work produced.

Elizabethan drama refers to the body of plays produced during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I (1558-1603) and is considered one of the most significant periods in the history of English theater. This era saw the emergence of some of the most renowned playwrights, including William Shakespeare, Christopher Marlowe, and Ben Jonson.

Let’s find out together!

Key Features of Elizabethan Drama:

• Themes and Styles: Elizabethan plays often explored themes of power, ambition, love, and betrayal. Tragedies typically centered on a heroic figure whose flaws led to their downfall, while comedies often satirized societal norms and featured complex plots with mistaken identities and humorous misunderstandings.
• Influences: The plays were influenced by classical Greek and Roman literature, medieval morality plays, and the Renaissance humanist movement. This blend of influences resulted in rich, multifaceted works that addressed both the human condition and contemporary societal issues.
• Performance and Audience: Theaters like The Globe and The Rose were popular venues where people from all walks of life gathered to watch performances. Despite the vibrant theater culture, women were not allowed to perform on stage, and female roles were played by young boys.

Elizabethan Theaters

Elizabethan theaters were quite distinctive and played a crucial role in the cultural life of the period. Here are some key features:

• Structure and Design: Theaters were typically open-air and circular or octagonal in shape. They had a central yard (or pit) where the audience stood, surrounded by three tiers of covered galleries. The stage was a raised platform that extended into the yard, allowing the audience to view the performance from three sides.
• Famous Theaters: Some of the most notable theaters included The Globe, The Rose, and The Swan. The Globe Theatre, associated with William Shakespeare, is perhaps the most famous. It was built in 1599 by the Lord Chamberlain’s Men, Shakespeare’s playing company.
• Audience and Atmosphere: The audience was diverse, ranging from the wealthy who sat in the galleries to the “groundlings” who stood in the pit. The atmosphere was lively and interactive, with audiences often reacting vocally to the performances.
• Performance Conditions: Performances were held in the afternoon to make use of natural light, as there was no artificial lighting. The stage had minimal scenery, relying instead on elaborate costumes and the audience’s imagination.
• Actors and Roles: All roles, including female characters, were played by men and boys, as women were not allowed to perform on stage. Acting troupes were often sponsored by nobles, which provided them with some protection and financial support.

These theaters were not just places of entertainment but also social hubs where people from different walks of life could come together. They played a significant role in the development of English drama and the arts.

Notable Playwrights:

• William Shakespeare: Known for his profound impact on English literature, Shakespeare’s works like “Hamlet,” “Othello,” and “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” remain timeless classics.
• Christopher Marlowe: His plays, such as “Doctor Faustus” and “Tamburlaine,” are noted for their poetic brilliance and exploration of complex characters.
• Ben Jonson: Renowned for his satirical comedies like “Volpone” and “The Alchemist,” Jonson’s works often critiqued contemporary society.

Elizabethan drama not only entertained but also reflected the social, political, and cultural dynamics of the time, making it a pivotal period in the evolution of theater.

You can use our chat service now for more immediate answers. Contact us anytime to discuss the details of the order

Biography of Christopher Marlowe

Christopher Marlowe was born in Canterbury on 6 th February, 1564 the same year he attribute William Shakespeare was born. She further added that although Marlowe’s father was only a shoemaker, “this did not deter Marlowe from education” (Ross 1). Marlowe attended school at King’s School where he was awarded a scholarship to Corpus Christi College Cambridge where he studied philosophy, history and theology. In the course of his studies, Marlowe disappeared from the University leading to various speculations that he may have been recruited as government spy (Ross 1). Marlowe was denied admission by Cambridge University for his Master of Arts degree due to “suspected Catholic sympathies” (Ross 1). However, he was later offered the chance after the intervention of the Queen’s Privy Council.

The first great dramatist and poet Marlowe joined the Lord Admiral’s Company in London as an actor and playwright in1587 (Berber 167). It is while at this company that Marlowe met literary figures like Sir Phillip Sidney and Sir Walter Raleigh. It was at this point that he wrote one of his great plays; Tamburlaine the Great. Marlowe’s other dramas includes; “Dr. Faustus, and the Jew of Malta and Edward II” (Berber 169). Marlowe had also written long poem; Hero and Leander and the Passionate Shepherd of His Love. He diversified his work to “cover both tragedies and the historical related dramas” (Ross 4).

Concerning his personality, Christopher Marlowe was a quick tempered man who was quick to get angered and quick to make enemies (Ross 4). Ross seemed to have believed that this could be the reason why Marlowe had spent two weeks in Newgate Goal jail in 1589 after he had been charged with murder case. Marlowe’s sexual orientation, his religious counter and political concern were widely speculative. This leads to Catholic and Protestant upheaval resulting to Marlowe’s charges of atheism, blasphemy and subversion (Ross 4).

Additionally, Marlowe was adversely suspected to be a heresy and this could have lead to his death in 1593 at the age of twenty nine. He was also stabbed in Deptford over what was seen as a quarrel over the dinner bill but was later believed as deliberated murder connected to his work as secret government agent (Berber 181).

Characteristics and Importance of Christopher Marlowe’s Work

Marlowe’s playwriting career which lasted for not more than six years had diverse and splendid achievements. By Marlowe’s playwright concentrating on tragedy and history aspects, it pointed out the necessity to individual responsibility (Ross 5). Christopher Marlowe deployed great writing methodology in his playwright and “was of much significance in the society" (Honan 87). Marlowe’s writing skills not only impacted on the entertainment arena but it also influenced peoples’ attitude on freedom of expression, occupational conduct and individual’s pasts (Honan 87).

The importance of Marlowe’s work style is widely imitated by most of the world best poets like; “Nashe, Kyd, Ben Johnson, and William Shakespeare” (Honan 89). This shows that Marlowe’s writing skill had great contributions in the education sector especially in the field of literature. A part from this, Marlowe has also contributed significantly to the development of English drama and language arts. Even though Marlowe’s moral conduct was questionable, his role in the society as playwright has had immense contribution (Ross 6). He notes that today’s drama skills are mainly based on the outline work done by famous Elizabethan dramatis including Marlowe.

This write up has proved that Christopher Marlowe and other Elizabethan dramatists have immensely contributed not only to the field of arts but also in other sectors like education. The works of such poets have continued to shape the career of the up-coming drama players. These dramatists had very enthusiastic writing skills that the world will continue to admire and use.

Calculate the Price of Your Paper

Related essays

• The Postmodernism
• Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man
• The Theme of Ultimate Independence

Along with the first order offer - 15% discount (with the code "MY15") , you save extra 10% since we provide 300 words/page instead of 275 words/page.

Elizabethan Drama

Renaissance was the period, which was evolved during the tenure of Elizabeth I. Literary prospect of this tenure is worth mentioning. Elizabethan period is famous and can be remembered because of the development in every field of life. Although, the progress of renaissance was slow yet this period is remembered because of the growth of literature. People increased their interest in dramas and university graduates, who were educated, can write and earn by showing their mastery in writing plays. Some of the university wits are remembered because of their immense interest in this field. Prior to Elizabeth’s period, people did not show interest in the plays as they were mostly moral and religious plays but with the emergence of new minds, people started gaining interest in plays and most of the free time, which the spent, was the theaters.It was the period, when England consolidated and many people migrated to London, therefor,keeping in view the interest of the people in drama, theaters were built. Elizabeth herself was also fond of drama; therefore, apart from the theaters, plays were also performed at royal court.

University wits began to write plays and they became prominent because of their different style of writing. Some prominent writers among them are Thomas Kyd and Christopher Marlow followed by Shakespeare. These writers are as fresh today as they were in that era because of their universal style. Some other play writers of Elizabethan period are John Lyly, Ben Johnson, George Peele and Robert Greene. These were the writers, who transformed the taste of dramas by their writing styles. For instance, Ben Jonson is known because of his cynical comedy. Thomas Kyd and Christopher Marlow are best recognized because of their tragedies. Christopher Marlow was prominent as compared to Thomas Kyd because of the usage of blank verse in his plays. Some notable plays of Christopher Marlow are Tamburlaine, Dr. Faustus and Jew of Malta. However, Dr. Faust is noticeable among them, in which a scholar because of his ambitions faces the downfall.

Say it Elizabethan period or the age of Shakespeare but it was the time when the writers had the time to show their hidden talents because of the emergence of theaters in London. Every writer showed his talent in form of writing plays with different thematic concept but Shakespeare was the one whose plays were mostly concerned with historical incidents and Greek concepts. Whereas, his comedies and romances are imaginative. Aristotle’s concept regarding the belonging of protagonist from upper class was ignored and the writers had proved that the element of catharsis could be fulfilled while portraying the hero from the upper middle class or lower class. The three unities had also been underestimate by the writers. For instance, in Shakespeare’s “The Winter’s Tale” and Christopher Marlow’s “Dr. Faustus”, unity of time had been underestimated by these two great writers.

Any article, on Elizabethan drama, can never be concluded without mention the name and work of all the writers of Elizabethan period. Major writers of that era are; John Lyly (1554-1606), who is famous for his combination of prose and poetic romances. His romance called“Euphues” is masterwork. Robert Greene(1558-1992) is known because of his simple and easy versification, influent style, classic ornaments and his comic humor. His interesting plays are; “The Honourable History of Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay”, “The Comical History of Alphonsus King of Aragon”, “A Looking Glass for London and England”, “The History of Orlondo Furioso” and “The Scottish History of James, the Fourth”. Similarly, the last one among them is John Webster (1580-1634), who is best known for his tragedies. His “The White Devil” and “Duchess of Malfi” are regarded as masterpiece of all times.

Thus, if Elizabethan period is known as the age of renaissance besides the age of Shakespeare then it is because of the evolution of drama. In this period, amongst all the other writers, Shakespeare was prominent figure because of his masterful dexterity. By setting aside the only genre of religious play, writers have introduced new genres to dramas such as comedy and tragedy. The plays, before Elizabethan, were religious focusing only on moral theme but the Elizabethan dramas are more secular and convenient, focusing on the heroic figure.In a nutshell, Shakespeare’s mastery, Ben Johnson’s satirical comedy, and Christopher Marlow’s tragedies made the Elizabethan drama a remarkable piece of literature.Hence, it is admitted fact that as far as the plays are concerned, Elizabeth era was the golden age for the world of English literature.

Introduction to Elizabethan Drama

Elizabethan Drama, often known as early modern English drama, refers back to the plays produced by the University Wits between the Reformation and the closure of the theatres in 1642. It includes the plays of Robert Green, George Peele, Christopher Marlowe, and many others followed the monumental work of William Shakespeare.

English Renaissance Drama is usually known as “Elizabethan Drama.” However, the term “Elizabethan Drama” adequately covers only the plays written and performed publicly in England throughout the reign of Queen Elizabeth (1558–1603).

Renaissance theatre derived from some medieval theatre traditions, such as the mystery plays that formed part of religious festivals in England and different parts of Europe. The mystery plays have been complicated retellings of legends based mostly on biblical themes, initially performed in church buildings however later becoming more linked to the secular celebrations that grew up around religious festivals. Other sources include the morality plays and the “university drama” that tried to recreate Greek tragedy.

Under Elizabeth, the drama was a unified expression so far as social class was involved. With the development of private theatres, drama grew to become more oriented towards the tastes and values of an upper-class audience. By the later part of the reign of Charles I, few new plays were written for the general public theatres, which sustained themselves on the collected works of the previous decades.

Read About: Contribution of Elizabethan Poetry in Elizabethan Age

In addition to the religious mystery plays on pageant wagons and circular stages resembling modern “theatres in the round,” dramatic entertainment was carried out within the great halls of royal and noble houses. Plays were also provided by traveling bands of actors on portable stages set up at fairs and different crowd-gathering events.

The first permanent theatre in England was located in Middlesex, simply outside the walls of London. As it was known, the theatre was created by James Burbage, father of Richard Burbage, the well-known actor. There is little direct information about the appearance of The Theatre. It was dismantled in 1598, and its timbers had been carried to the Bankside, south of London, across the Thames River.

The age of Shakespeare—and Marlowe, Kyd, Chapman, Ben Jonson, and several different dramatists—extends roughly from 1590 to 1625. During this era, London most likely had more theatre houses in ratio to its population than at any other time. Excluding informal theatre spaces resembling the great halls of the aristocracy and such organizations as the Inns of Court (where England’s lawyers had been trained), there were seven open-air theatres and four indoor theatres.

The outdoor theatres relied on natural light. They used few stage props and no stage sets in the modern sense of the term. These seeming limitations inspired many probably the most brilliant features of Elizabethan drama. The lack of stage sets allowed the dramatists to create rapid, extraordinarily fluid actions. Scenes succeeded one another without interruption, considerably within the manner of twentieth-century movies. The lack of stage sets forced the Elizabethan dramatists to create what is perhaps known as a theatre of the imagination.

Genres of the Elizabethan Drama

Genres of the period included the history play, which depicted English or European history. Shakespeare’s plays concerning the lives of kings, akin to Richard III and Henry V, belong to this class, as do Christopher Marlowe’s Edward II and George Peele’s Famous Chronicle of King Edward the First. Many history plays dealt with more current events, like A Larum for London, which dramatizes the Sack of Antwerp in 1576.

The tragedy was a well-liked genre. Marlowe’s tragedies have been exceptionally well-liked, such as Dr. Faustus and The Jew of Malta. The audiences notably liked revenge dramas, such as Thomas Kyd’s The Spanish Tragedy.

Comedies have been widespread, too. A sub-genre developed during this period was the city comedy, which deals satirically with life in London after the style of Roman New Comedy. Examples are Thomas Dekker’s The Shoemaker’s Holiday and Thomas Middleton’s A Chaste Maid in Cheapside.

Why were Theatres Closed in Elizabethan Age?

The rising Puritan movement was hostile towards theatre, as they felt that “entertainment” was sinful. Politically, playwrights and actors had been clients of the monarchy and aristocracy, and most supported the Royalist cause. The Puritan faction, long highly effective in London, gained control of the city early within the English Civil War, and on September 2, 1642, ordered the closure of the London theatres. The theatres remained closed for many the next eighteen years, re-opening after the Restoration of the monarchy in 1660. The re-opened theatres carried out lots of the plays of the earlier era, although usually in adapted forms; new genres of Restoration comedy and spectacle soon evolved, giving English theatre of the later seventeenth century its distinctive character.

Thoughts? Share in the comment section!

For free Udemy courses visit this site:  Free Udemy Courses

And yes! if you need premium accounts at cheapest rate inbox me on my Facebook page at:  Premium Palace

Subscribe my YouTube channel at:  The Stream Post

Follow on Facebook page of Literature Times at:  Literature Times on Facebook

Contribution of Elizabethan Poetry in Elizabethan Age

Briefly explained restoration period in english literature, related articles.

To the Lighthouse; Role of Women

Evolution of Storytelling: From Oral Tradition to Digital Age

Realism in Waiting for Godot

Stream of Consciousness in A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man

One comment.

the information in this notes is very priceless and knowledgeable for all sort of students.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

Elizabethan literature

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

Elizabethan literature , body of works written during the reign of Elizabeth I of England (1558–1603), probably the most splendid age in the history of English literature , during which such writers as Sir Philip Sidney , Edmund Spenser , Roger Ascham , Richard Hooker , Christopher Marlowe , and William Shakespeare flourished. The epithet Elizabethan is merely a chronological reference and does not describe any special characteristic of the writing.

The Elizabethan age saw the flowering of poetry (the sonnet , the Spenserian stanza , dramatic blank verse ), was a golden age of drama (especially for the plays of Shakespeare), and inspired a wide variety of splendid prose (from historical chronicles , versions of the Holy Scriptures, pamphlets, and literary criticism to the first English novels). From about the beginning of the 17th century a sudden darkening of tone became noticeable in most forms of literary expression, especially in drama, and the change more or less coincided with the death of Elizabeth. English literature from 1603 to 1625 is properly called Jacobean, after the new monarch, James I . But, insofar as 16th-century themes and patterns were carried over into the 17th century, the writing from the earlier part of his reign, at least, is sometimes referred to by the amalgam “Jacobethan.”

Elizabethan Drama Essays

The use of numbering and its repercussions in shakespeare and christopher marlowe’s plays, popular essay topics.

• American Dream
• Artificial Intelligence
• Black Lives Matter
• Bullying Essay
• Career Goals Essay
• Causes of the Civil War
• Child Abusing
• Civil Rights Movement
• Community Service
• Cultural Identity
• Cyber Bullying
• Death Penalty
• Depression Essay
• Domestic Violence
• Freedom of Speech
• Global Warming
• Gun Control
• Human Trafficking
• I Believe Essay
• Immigration
• Importance of Education
• Israel and Palestine Conflict
• Leadership Essay
• Legalizing Marijuanas
• Mental Health
• National Honor Society
• Police Brutality
• Pollution Essay
• Racism Essay
• Romeo and Juliet
• Same Sex Marriages
• Social Media
• The Great Gatsby
• The Yellow Wallpaper
• Time Management
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• Violent Video Games
• What Makes You Unique
• Why I Want to Be a Nurse
• Send us an e-mail

You are now being redirected to easypdfs.cloud....

Recent Literature on the Elizabethan Drama

THE appearance of the New Variorum edition of Richard III 1 has been awaited by students of Shakespeare with much interest and perhaps some anxiety. For it had been announced that this play had been entrusted by Dr. Furness to his son, Mr. H. H. Furness, Jr., who had already revised one of the earlier volumes of the edition, but of whose capacity as an independent editor scholars had had little opportunity of judging. The volume now in our hands, then, is important as indicating what we are to expect of the man whom the veteran Shakespearean has trained to assist him in the completion of his great task. That a colleague should have to be provided at all is a matter for regret; but when we consider that it is well over a quarter of a century since the first volume appeared, and that there are still more than twenty to come, we must be thankful that the later volumes are to fall into such satisfactory hands.

For the promise of this first volume is indeed satisfactory. We find here not only, as we expect, the same plan and the same method which have proved so helpful and adequate in the past, but, so far as we can judge, the same laborious conscientiousness, shirking no toil which can make for completeness, the same skill in selection and condensation, the same unremitting zeal for accuracy. Differences, of course, there are. In the notes, the contributions by the editor himself are more succinct, more impersonal, than those of his father have been in the more recent volumes; and one misses the flashes of humor that have often afforded relief when the fatuity of earlier commentators put the reader most in need of it. The Preface, too, is less provocative than we have found those of some recent volumes, and, if less entertaining, it attends to business perhaps somewhat more strictly. The handling of the question of text, peculiarly difficult in this play, shows to some small extent a lack of experience, and implies a view of textual criticism that is not entirely sound; but the plan of the edition, with its exhaustive record of all authoritative readings, makes this of little or no importance. Taking the volume as a whole, we are delighted to be able to offer congratulations to all concerned : to Dr. Furness on a colleague so well-chosen and so well-trained; to the new editor on a highly auspicious beginning; and to the public on the prospect of a more rapid completion of an indispensable undertaking.

Of all Shakespeare’s works, Hamlet continues to be the most provocative of comment and controversy. Three books on this tragedy are now before me; but two of these are not really new. The Heart of Hamlet’s Mystery 2 is a translation of lectures first delivered in Berlin by Karl Werder in 1859-60, and published in 1875. A Review of Hamlet 3 is merely a reprint of Miles’s essay, originally issued in 1870. Both were notable criticisms in their day, and Werder’s theory has remained one of the stock interpretations. But both are extremely diffuse; and there are few purposes that could not be adequately served by such a summary as one finds in the second volume of Dr. Furness’s new variorum Hamlet.

The main point of Werder’s position is that Hamlet’s difficulties are purely external: because his aim was not mere revenge, by killing the king, but divine justice, which was only to be accomplished by bringing the murderer to open confession. It has often been remarked in reply that if Shakespeare meant Hamlet’s quest to be this larger justice, and not blood for blood, it is strange that he should have left the distinction so obscure. Werder’s own statements of this view are often wildly paradoxical. “ Because Hamlet ought to do what no one can do, and what he must still desire to do — that is the tragic destiny to which the poet has assigned him.” But he does not explain on what theory of moral responsibility a man ought to achieve the impossible. This contradiction vitiates the whole of Werder’s view of the tragic action. Nevertheless, his lectures have had a wholesome influence on the course of Hamlet criticism, for they have sent students back to the text to test the grounds for such theories as those of Goethe and Coleridge, who find the whole ground for delay in defects in the character of the hero.

From the mass of florid rhetoric in Miles’s book, exalting Shakespeare and Hamlet with a complete absence of critical judgment, one point emerges: the view that the attack of the pirates upon Hamlet’s ship was prearranged by him. This notion has been dealt with by some modern critics with more gentleness than it deserves. It was not Shakespeare’s practice to leave obscure the happenings in his plays. Whatever subtleties he may have elaborated in the characters, he was enough of the practical playwright to make clear to the whole audience all he wished them to know of the external activities in a drama. He certainly did not make clear to his audience, as he easily might have done, that Hamlet plotted his own capture; it is therefore only justice to him to infer that he did not wish to indicate it. The republication of this essay, then, would seem to have been unnecessary; and it lacks even the partial justification which the translation of Werder finds in the calm and reasonable summing up of the state of the case which Dr. Rolfe has written as an introduction to the lectures of the German scholar.

A very different style and treatment meet us in Professor C. M. Lewis’s volume. 4 Here we have no hazy metaphysics, no overwrought rhetoric piling up fanatical superlatives, no diffuseness, no exaggeration. The book is little more than half the size of Werder’s or Miles’s, yet it contains many times the matter. Nor is its condensation obtained at the cost of clearness. Few Shakespearean discussions are so lucid, leave so little doubt as to what the critic really means. Part of this superiority is due to Professor Lewis’s command of a restrained style, part to the kind of criticism which he employs. The book is an essay in the historical method, an attempt to explain the mystery of Hamlet by showing how the tragedy came to its present form. Hamlet defies consistent interpretation, he concludes, because it is not a consistent creation, but a growth which retains many bewildering features that would have found no place in the final result had Shakespeare been cutting out of whole cloth instead of making over an old garment. With this general belief he traces the successive forms of the story, beginning with Belleforest, reconstructing the hypothetical lost Hamlet, now usually ascribed to Kyd, and using these with the German Hamlet and the three Shakespearean versions to ascertain what elements in the play as we know it are merely inherited, what are made over, and what invented by Shakespeare.

The time was ripe for such a contribution as this. The work of Boas on Kyd, and of Thorndike on the tragedy of revenge, had suggested and made familiar to Shakespeare students the general point of view from which Professor Lewis elaborates his investigation; and whatever conclusions criticism may in the future reach, it may be safely affirmed that the factors here discussed can never again be wisely ignored. It is indeed conceivable that a finished play might contain even as great a mass of merely inherited episode as it is here shown to be probable that Shakespeare received from his predecessors, and yet that the dramatist might revolutionize the type of hero and the whole tone of the tragedy and leave none of these survivals unassimilated. But the feat would be wellnigh miraculous, and in the face of the difficulties which the play undeniably presents, it seems unlikely that it was here accomplished.

The discussion in the future, then, is likely to be concerned with the extent of these unassimilated survivals. It is natural that Professor Lewis should go far in his estimate of it; further, I am inclined to think, than most scholars will care to follow. One may accept his general attitude, and yet refuse to regard Hamlet’s immediate adoption of the pretense of madness as irreconcilable with his character in the finished play, or to regard Shakespeare’s treatment of Ophelia as merely a half-hearted working over of a part of the earlier play which he was hopeless of making convincing or really relevant. It would take more space than is here available to discuss profitably these and other tempting problems; but the suggestion of a difference of opinion should not obscure our belief that Professor Lewis has, in this rich and suggestive little volume, made an acute and solid contribution to one of the great problems of literature, a contribution that can be enjoyed by the ordinary educated reader as well as by the specialist.

But let us hope that the unsuspecting reader will not fall into the hands of the author of “a brief for the defendant” in the case of The Critics versus Shakspere . 5 This author, presumably a lawyer, is an idolatrous admirer of Shakespeare, who, besides his favorite author, has read a considerable number of commentaries. He has not, however, gained any idea of their relative authority, or of the advance of scholarship which has in many cases made the opinions of earlier critics, however estimable in their day, worthless as evidence now. He has finally stumbled upon Professor Wendell’s William Shakspere and Professor Thorndike’s dissertation on the Influence of Beaumont and Fletcher on Shakspere, and lashes himself into fury over what he supposes to be the assaults of these writers upon the object of his worship. The crimes which he attacks are in fact just such historical studies as have prepared the way for Professor Lewis’s book on Hamlet, and it is hardly necessary here to explain the value of such investigation. Professor Wendell’s phrase, “ economy of invention,” expresses admirably a fact about Shakespeare that is recognized today by all competent scholars, and it is a pity that Mr. Smith should work himself up to the point of publication before he reflects that it is no insult to Shakespeare to try to understand his methods of work.

The trouble seems to be caused by Mr. Smith’s inability to read accurately, and so to quote fairly, the critics he opposes. When he says that Wendell and Thorndike state that Shakespeare’s “ comedies are but adaptations from Greene or Boccaccio,” that “ Cymbeline is but an imitation of Philaster ,” he is guilty of misrepresentation; and the method is by the insertion of the “ but ” which I have italicized, and which, we are willing to believe, he was unconscious of inserting. Till a critic gets beyond slips like this, he can hardly hope to command attention.

On a very different scale from these treatments of special points is the massive work of Professor Schelling. 6 Through his own publications on the Elizabethan lyric, on Gascoigne, Jonson, and others, and through the work of his students at the University of Pennsylvania, Professor Schelling had already earned an enviable reputation as an authority on this period, and the two volumes now before us are the crowning result of many years of absorption in the richest portion of English literature. The book purports to be an exhaustive history of the English drama from the accession of Elizabeth in 1558 to the closing of the theatres in 1642, with introductory chapters on the mediæval drama; and it is completed with a bibliographical essay, a list of plays, and an admirable index. These appendices, apart from the value of the text, make the book something for which all students of the drama will be grateful.

It is hard to overestimate the labor involved in such a work as this. The firsthand study of some eight hundred plays is but a part of the task; for the mass of criticism and controversy on these dramas is now beyond the power of man to measure. Of the thoroughness with which Professor Schelling has read the documents themselves, one has only to turn to his book itself to be convinced; this was a possibility, and it has been fulfilled with honesty and keen judgment. An exhaustive reading of the comment is neither possible nor profitable; on the whole, Professor Schelling has covered with success the part of it which is important. Here and there he seems to have failed to get the whole bearing of a critic’s argument; here and there opinions will differ as to his choice of sides, as when he follows Fleay and Penniman rather than Small and Malory, in the discussion of the war of the theatres, or when he stumbles upon inferior authorities in such a case as that of George Buchanan, thereby missing the political significance of the plays of the great Scottish humanist. Further, one remarks at times an unfortunate lack of explicitness in the footnotes. It is frequently not possible to infer whether the book mentioned in the note is cited as source or corroboration, or as a reference to an opinion contrary to that expressed in the text. This vagueness does injustice sometimes to Professor Schelling, sometimes to the author cited; though it is clear, from the generosity in acknowledgment shown throughout, that such a fault as the second is the last thing Professor Schelling would consciously commit.

Turning from these details to the body of the treatise, we are interested first of all in the novel method. Professor Schelling has sought “ to relate not only those facts concerning the drama of this period which are usually comprehended under the term history, but likewise to determine the development of species among dramatic compositions within the period; to ascertain, as nearly as possible, the character of each play considered, and refer it to its type; to establish its relations to what had preceded and to what was to follow; and definitely to learn when a given dramatic species appeared, how long it continued, and when it was superseded by other forms.”

If it is asked what the present volumes accomplish that is not already done, say, in Professor A. W. Ward’s History of English Dramatic Literature, the answer is here. Ward, like other previous historians of the period, follows a chronological and biographical method. The study of separate dramatic species receives only slight incidental attention from him, and has elsewhere been pursued only in one or two detached volumes such as Professor Schelling’s own volume on the Chronicle Play, and more recently in Professor Thorndike’s masterly treatment of Tragedy. Now Professor Schelling has attempted the mapping out of the whole field of Elizabethan dramatic production according to this method, and the result is interesting in the extreme. About the value of the method there can, I think, be no question. Only by such recognition and classifying of types can the essential nature and historical explanation of many a drama be made to stand out. It was really by the previous study of the tragedy of revenge that Professor Lewis’s contribution to the interpretation of Hamlet was made possible. Again, the influence of foreign literatures, as well as of contemporaries at home, is much more easily and more accurately perceived by this than by the biographical method. It is the characteristic weapon of the comparative study of literature, and comparative study is the method of the immediate future.

But the difficulties and the dangers of this study by types are undeniably great. Such terms as “ species ” call to mind biological classifications which raise expectations doomed to disappointment. For in the field of literature neither logical nor biological precision in classification can be achieved, since hybrids are almost the rule and pure specimens the exception. The value of the result is not to be found in any final pigeon-holing of all literary products; but in supplying a terminology for the various elements found in combination in most, in thus furthering intelligible analyses, in bringing out unsuspected relations, in suggesting new points of view, in defining types to which existing specimens are approximations. Not only the same author, but the same book, must necessarily appear again and again in different connections. As You Like It, for example, might be found under such various discussions as those on romantic comedy, pastoral drama, and Robin Hood plays; and each classification would be justified. The loss involved in such scattering need not be denied, but it should be remembered that a loss equally great is involved in the older biographical method, when the history, say of pastoral drama, must be searched for through a score of chapters on different authors. It is manifest, too, that no universal agreement as to this classification by types can be expected. There will always be difference of opinion about which of several characteristics in a given work is predominant, and, in the logical sense, “ specific.” The discussion of such questions only sharpens critical perception, and agreement is comparatively unimportant. The recognition and definition of the elements is the valuable thing, and that will become clearer and clearer. He is the best critic, said old Puttenham, who can discern most differences.

This general discussion of method has seemed necessary in order to bring out the fact that a difference of opinion about the wisdom of this or that bit of classification does not imply that, if another division is preferred by the critic, the one adopted by the author is valueless. Thus it must be confessed that a first reading of Professor Schelling’s Table of Contents is bewildering. We have twenty chapters with different titles, sixteen of which seem to indicate independent species without subordination. It seems as if, even at the risk of apparent pedantry, a more obvious scheme of division and subdivision would have been preferable for the sake of clearness. Again, many would have preferred a broader recognition of the distinction between comedy and tragedy, which tends to be obscured in such chapters as those on the “ New Romantic Drama.” Subject-matter is often not to be ignored in classification according to species; but criteria drawn from formal differences are to be preferred when they are available.

In such a division as “ Historical Drama on Foreign Themes ” it would seem as if a somewhat superficial difference in subject-matter had been magnified out of proportion in being made a specific characteristic. As the study of the Elizabethan drama proceeds, such questions will doubtless be threshed out, and it is easy to say that if Professor Schelling had waited longer, further special studies would have supplied material that would have benefited his work. But much is gained, even for such further studies, by this bold attempt to map out the entire field along new lines. The very vagueness and lack of definition which appear here and there are of value in drawing the attention of scholars to those parts of the field which especially invite research.

Meanwhile, it must be admitted that the work as we have it abundantly justifies itself. The originality of Professor Schelling’s volumes is not exhausted when we have discussed the novelty of its plan. The critical treatment of the individual plays as works of art is perhaps as distinguished a feature as the contributions to the scientific investigation of literary history and theory; it is conducted with sanity, acuteness, and much enthusiastic appreciation, and it is expressed in a style which often rises to beauty and which, throughout, resists with wonderful vitality the tendency to become jaded that so easily appears in literary histories on a large scale. The work as a whole is assuredly one to bring credit to American scholarship both at home and abroad.

The “ new Swinburne ” whom his publishers announce as revealed in his latest volume of criticism, is not easily discovered by any one familiar with the veteran poet’s previous utterances upon the Elizabethan drama. In the nine essays on Marlowe, Webster, Dekker, Marston, Middleton, Rowley, Heywood, Chapman, and Tourneur, which he has gathered into a volume under the title of The Age of Shakespeare , 7 we find little more than a continuation of the streams of turgid eloquence which he poured forth in his earlier monographs on Shakespeare, Jonson,and Chapman. The virtues and the vices are those to which we have become accustomed in what we call Swinburne’s critical writings, more to distinguish them from his creative work than because they are in any ordinary sense critical. For his temper is too ebullient for the processes of patient discernment and impartial balancing with which criticism is supposed to be concerned; his mood is commonly too violently partisan.

The method which he here as elsewhere employs is simple enough. The Elizabethan dramatists seem to be conceived by him as a school divided into classes. The head boy in almost all subjects is admitted to be Shakespeare; and the bulk of the book consists of an attempt to create a series of classes in which the subjects of the several essays may in turn occupy the seat next to the head boy. Thus, Shakespeare excepted, Marlowe is first in the sublime, Webster in pure tragedy, and so forth. When a dramatist cannot be placed second, he is still rated in terms that recall the schoolroom. Tom Dekker is really a boy of much talent, if only he would take himself and his work seriously. John Marston can write as great things as any one, if only he would not spoil them the next moment.

This conception of criticism as a perpetual ranking in order of merit accounts for two of the most obtrusive elements of Mr. Swinburne’s style — the constant striving after unique superlatives, and the surplusage of adjectives. It is these characteristics that make his prose, sprinkled though it is with brilliant and wonderful things, so shrill and highpitched as to tire the ear, and so noisy that it is often hard to hear what he is saying. But one cannot at once describe and illustrate his way of writing better than he himself has unconsciously done in the following passage on Marston : —

“ A vehement and resolute desire to give weight to every line and emphasis to every phrase has too often misled him into such brakes and jungles of crabbed and convulsive bombast, of stiff and tortuous exuberance, that the reader in struggling through some of the scenes and speeches feels as though he were compelled to push his way through a cactus hedge: the hot and heavy blossoms of rhetoric blaze and glare out of a thickset fence of jagged barbarisms and exotic monstrosities of metaphor. The straining and sputtering declamation of narrative and outcry scarcely succeeds in expressing through a dozen quaint and farfetched words or phrases what two or three of the simplest would easily and amply have sufficed to convey. But when the poet is content to deliver his message like a man of the world, we discover with mingled satisfaction, astonishment, and irritation that he can write when he pleases in a style of the purest and noblest simplicity.”

Of the content of these critiques it is hard to give any summary account. Their value lies chiefly in a number of obiter dicta, often very keen and very illuminating; but these, while they might be extracted, could not be condensed. It is interesting to note his detection of hitherto unnoted influences of several of the dramatists on Milton; to compare his earlier praise of Byron’s “ sincerity and strength ” with his condemnation of him now in such phrases as “ blatant and flatulent ineptitude,” or “ a quack less impudent but not less transparent than the less inspired and more inflated ventriloquist of Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage ; ” to read his recantation of what he now regards as the heresy that Marlowe lacks humor. These things sometimes interest and sometimes amuse, but they seldom convince, and they usually jar.

It is not a pleasant thing to see a man whom we would fain reverence for his achievement, still continuing to display in his old age the rancor and contempt that have so long disfigured his prose, still unable to differ without insult, or to talk of an opponent or a fallen idol without what he himself, with characteristic taste, calls “ emetic emotions.”

• The Tragedy of Richard the Third , in A New Variorum Edition of Shakespeare. Edited by H. H. FURNESS, Jr. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co. 1908. ↩
• The Heart of Hamlet’s Mystery. Translated from the German of Karl Werder. By ELIZABETH WILDER, with Introduction by W. J. ROLFS. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons. 1907. ↩
• A Review of Hamlet. By GEORGE HENRY MILES. New edition. New York : Longmans, Green & Co. 1907. ↩
• The Genesis of Hamlet. By CHARLTON M. LEWIS, Emily Sanford Professor of English Literature in Yale University. New York : Henry Holt & Co. 1907. ↩
• The Critics versus Shakspere : A Brief for the Defendant. By FRANCIS A. SMITH. New York: The Knickerbocker Press. 1907. ↩
• Elizabethan Drama, 1558-1642. By FELIX E. SCHELLING, Professor in the University of Pennsylvania. 2 vols. Boston and New York : Houghton Mifflin Co. 1908. ↩
• The Age of Shakespeare. By ALGERNON CHARLES SWINBURNE. New York and London: Harper & Bros. 1908. ↩