No More Learning

_: 'The malignant Ben, does
indeed, in his _Devil's an Ass_, 1616, sneer at our author's
historical pieces, which for twenty years preceding had been in high
reputation, and probably were _then_ the only historical dramas that
had possession of the theatre; but from the list above given, it is
clear that Shakespeare was not the _first_ who dramatized our old
chronicles; and that the principal events of English History were
familiar to the ears of his audience, before he commenced a writer
for the stage. ' Malone here refers to quotations taken from Gosson
and Lodge. Both these essays were reprinted in Steevens' edition, and
Malone's statements were repeated in the edition by Dr. Chalmers.

In 1808 appeared Gilchrist's essay, _An Examination of the
Charges . . . of Ben Jonson's enmity,_ etc. _towards Shakespeare_.
This refutation, strengthened by Gifford's _Proofs of Ben
Jonson's Malignity_, has generally been deemed conclusive.
Gifford's note on the present passage is written with much
asperity. He was not content, however, with an accurate
restatement of Malone's arguments. He changes the italics in
order to produce an erroneous impression, printing thus: 'which
were probably then the _only historical dramas on the stage_:
He adds: 'And this is advanced in the very face of his own
arguments, to prove that there were scores, perhaps hundreds, of
others on it at the time. ' This is direct falsification. There
is no contradiction in Malone's arguments.
What he attempted
to prove was that Shakespeare had had predecessors in this
field, but that in 1616 his plays held undisputed possession
of the stage. Gifford adds a passage from Heywood's _Apology
for Actors_, 1612, which is more to the point: 'Plays have
taught the unlearned the knowledge of many famous _histories_,
instructed such as cannot read in the discovery of our _English
Chronicles_: and what man have you now of that weake capacity
that being possest of their true use, cannot discourse of any
notable thing recorded even from _William the Conqueror_, until
this day? '

This passage seems to point to the existence of other historical plays
_contemporary_ with those of Shakespeare. Besides, Jonson's words
seem sufficiently harmless. Nevertheless, although I am not inclined
to accept Malone's charge of 'malignity', I cannot agree with Gifford
that the reference is merely a general one. I have no doubt that the
'Chronicle,' of which Merecraft speaks, is Hall's, and the passage
the following: 'It semeth to many men, that the name and title of
Gloucester, hath been vnfortunate and vnluckie to diuerse, whiche
for their honor, haue been erected by creacion of princes, to that
stile and dignitie, as Hugh Spencer, Thomas of Woodstocke, sonne to
kyng Edward the third, and this duke Humfrey, which thre persones,
by miserable death finished their daies, and after them kyng Richard
the iii. also, duke of Gloucester, in ciuill warre was slaine and
confounded: so y^t this name of Gloucester, is take for an vnhappie
and vnfortunate stile, as the prouerbe speaketh of Seianes horse,
whose rider was euer unhorsed, and whose possessor was euer brought to
miserie. ' Hall's _Chronicle_, ed. 1809, pp. 209-10. The passage in 'the
Play-bookes' which Jonson satirizes is at the close of _3 Henry VI. _ 2.
6:

_Edw. _ Richard, I will create thee Duke of Gloucester,
And George, of Clarence: Warwick, as ourself,
Shall do and undo as him pleaseth best.
_Rich. _ Let me be Duke of Clarence, George of Gloucester;
For Gloucester's dukedom is too ominous.