OJarncIl JIlmoerHity Htbratg 
 
 3tt;aca, Hew ^otk 
 
 BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE 
 
 SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND 
 
 THE GIFT OF 
 
 HENRY W. SAGE 
 
 1891 
 
Cornell University Library 
 PR 2947.C5R65 
 
 Shakespeare and Chapman; a thesis of Chap 
 
 ill 
 
 3 1924 013 154 178 
 
a Cornell University 
 P Library 
 
 The original of tiiis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924013154178 
 
SHAKESPEARE 
 
 AND 
 
 CHAPMAN 
 
SHAKESPEARE 
 
 AND 
 
 CHAPMAN 
 
 A THESIS OF CHAPMAN'S 
 AUTHORSHIP OF "A LOVER'S 
 COMPLAINT," AND HIS 
 ORIGINATION OF "TIMON 
 OF ATHENS." WITH INDICA- 
 TIONS of FURTHER PROBLEMS 
 
 BY 
 
 J. M. ROBERTSON 
 
 "M-P. 
 
 Author of " Elizabethan Literature," 
 
 "The Baconian Heresy," "Montaigne 
 
 and Shakespeare," " Did Shakespeare 
 
 write ' Titus Andronicus ' ? " etc. 
 
 T. FISHER UNWIN LTD 
 
 ADELPHI TERRACE 
 LONDON 
 
 (^ 
 
First published in 1917 
 
 All rights reset ved 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PART I 
 
 A Lover's Complaixt " 
 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 7 
 
 §1. The "Rival Poet" . 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 g2. The Style of the "Complaint" 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 § 3. Marks of Chapman . 
 
 
 
 . 32 
 
 ^ 4. Syntax 
 
 
 
 44 
 
 § 5. Vocabulary 
 
 
 
 51 
 
 § 6. Special Clues to Chapman . 
 
 
 
 56 
 
 § 7. Chapman's Vocabulary Collated 
 
 
 
 76 
 
 PART II 
 
 The Poets' Personal Relations 
 § 1 . Early Rivalry 
 §3. "Love's Labour's Lost" 
 
 97 
 
 99 
 
 107 
 
 FART III 
 
 
 TiMON OP Athens" . ^ . . 
 
 . 121 
 
 § 1. Clues to Chapman 
 
 . 123 
 
 § 2. The Test of Vocabulary 
 
 . 145 
 
 § 3. Chapman's Vocabulary Collated 
 
 . 154 
 
 § 4. inferences . . 
 
 . 173 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PART IV 
 
 Further Problems .... 
 §1. "Pericles" .... 
 §2. "Troilus and Cressida" 
 §3. "Classical" Interludes 
 
 a. The Masque in the "Tempest" 
 
 b. The Interludes in "Hamlet" . 
 
 c. The Interlude in "Oymbeline" 
 %i. "Julius Caesar" 
 
 §6. "The Taming of the Shrew" 
 
 §6. The "Henry VI " Trilogy . 
 
 §7. "Henry V" . 
 
 §8. The Early Comedies— the "Errors' 
 Gentlemen" .... 
 
 §9. "All's Well that Ends Well" 
 
 and 
 
 'Two 
 
 PAGE 
 183 
 
 185 
 193 
 210 
 210 
 215 
 218 
 220 
 226 
 239 
 246 
 
 257 
 262 
 
 Epilogue 
 General Index 
 Index of Words Cited 
 Index op Phrases Cited 
 
 274 
 293 
 297 
 303 
 
PART I 
 A LOVER'S COMPLAINT 
 
PART I 
 "A LOVER'S COMPLAINT" 
 
 § 1. THE "RIVAL POET" 
 
 For many students of Shakespeare, the poem A Lover's 
 Complaint, printed by Thorpe at the end of the Sonnets 
 (1609), must always have been a stumbling-block. Con- 
 taining as it does only two lines that anybody greatly cares 
 to remember, some that can be remembered only with 
 derision, and a multitude of frigid concetti that jar upon 
 the aesthetic sense, the poem has been for many of us a 
 source of dull perplexity. To Shakespeare's fame it con- 
 tributed nothing; and only the comparative unimportance 
 of the problem kept it undiscussed. 
 
 Sir Sidney Lee among contemporary Shakespeareans 
 has won the credit of first avowing scepticism as to the 
 authorship. " If, as is possible, it be by Shakespeare," he 
 wrote in his first Life, " it must have been written in very 
 early days." ' That pronouncement Sir Sidney followed up 
 in his introduction to the facsimile of the Sonnets in 1905 ; 
 and in the new edition of his valuable biography, fortified by 
 the support of Professor Mackail, he offers grounds in diction 
 and style for the opinion that " Shakespeare's responsibility 
 for A Lover's Complaint may well be questioned." 
 
 To the essay of Professor Mackail, published in the third 
 
 ' This view had been previously put by Dr. A. W. Ward in his History 
 of English Dramatic Literature (ed. 1899, ii. 32) with the remark : " I 
 am not aware that Shakespeare's authorship of this poem . . . has ever 
 been seriously disputed," Mr. Samuel Butler held that the " internal 
 evidence of style . . . admits of no doubt" that the poem is Shake- 
 speare's, and pronounces it " wonderful " {Shakespeare's Sonnets, 1899, 
 ppi 2, 116). 
 
 9 
 
10 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 volume of the English Association's Essays and Studies 
 (1912), must be assigned the praise of having forced the 
 problem to a solution. For the first time, it subjects the 
 poem to a thorough analysis as regards style, content, and 
 vocabulary; and after a very judicial weighing of all that 
 can critically be said for Shakespeare's authorship, it comes 
 to a negative conclusion, offering the hypothesis that the 
 poem, surreptitiously published as it was with the Sonnets, 
 may be the work of the " rival poet " of Sonnets 80 and 86. 
 This suggestion Sir Sidney Lee finds "less convincing" 
 than the negative conclusion ; and at the first blush it might 
 even seem fantastic. But it turns out upon investigation to 
 be a singularly happy hypothesis. It leads not only to an 
 identification of the author, but to the further establishment 
 of the late Professor Minto's hypothesis as to the identity of 
 the rival poet. If not the rival poet, certainly the author 
 of A Lovee's Complaint, can now, I think, be proved to be 
 Chapman. 
 
 In putting such a proposition, one leaves somewhat 
 indeterminate the question of the authenticity of all the 
 Sonnets, which were ostensibly published without permis- 
 sion, and were never acknowledged by Shakespeare. Long 
 ago, stirred by a qualm, I satisfied myself that the diction 
 of the great mass is really his ; but it is obviously impossible 
 to be sure of all. Professor Mackail holds, with many of 
 us, that " 153 and 154 are pretty certainly not by Shake- 
 speare; 128 and 145 are very doubtful; and a plausible 
 case can be made out against 135, 136, and 143." ^ I would 
 add that there are some grounds for doubt about 5, with its 
 dissyllabic " hours " and its " very same " ; and about 35, 
 where, in an enigmatic and apparently isolated piece, we 
 have a line not only unconstruable but false in scansion : 
 Excusing their sin3 more than their" sins are 
 
 ' Essay cited, p. 64. 
 
 " The two "their's " of the original are in modern editions changed to 
 " thy's." It would be more plausible to alter only the first ; but the line 
 would still read badly. 
 
THE "RIVAL POET" 11 
 
 — a thing hardly to be matched in the Sonnets. The colloca- 
 tion of "fountains" and "mud'' is indeed to be matched 
 twice in Lucrece ; hence a contrary doubt. ■ But among 
 the more colourless sonnets, and even in others,' we have 
 not an absolutely perfect right to certainty ; and the case 
 should be argued under that caveat. 
 
 The critical principles that apply are the style test and 
 the test of total congruity. What can be done in the way 
 of special pleading was illustrated last year in a very enter- 
 taining letter in the Times' Literary Supplement, wherein 
 a gentleman of the Temple argued very ingeniously that 
 the Sonnets are by Ealeigh. Accepting the view that the 
 rival poet was Chapman, he proceeded with ostensible 
 consistency to ask who was Chapman's patron, and found, 
 of course, that it was Prince Henry, to whom was dedicated 
 the translation of twelve Books of the Iliad in 1609. This, 
 then, was the " lovely boy " of Sonnet 126. Now, Prince 
 Henry was known to have encouraged Ealeigh to write his 
 History op the World : and Sonnet 125, inexplicable as 
 coming from Shakespeare, was clearly traceable to Sir 
 Walter, who had "laid great bases for eternity" in his 
 colonizing projects, which had " proved more short than 
 waste or ruining " ; and who might well denounce the 
 " suborn'd informer." It was all much cleverer than any- 
 thing ever produced by the Baconians. If seriously 
 contemplated, of course, the thesis, whether or not seriously 
 framed, goes down at once when collated with the Sonnets 
 in general. Exhortations to Prince Henry to marry at or 
 before the age of fifteen, and hints that he has been living 
 a fast life, are not explanations that can detain us ; and the 
 theory that Ealeigh confessed to having made himself " a 
 motley to the view" is similarly intangible. But still. 
 Sonnet 125 might be by somebody else than Shake- 
 
 ' I have my doubts, for instance, about Sonnet 129, which begins 
 with a Chapmanesque expression, never again found in Shakespeare, 
 and is a piece of soliloquy not in Shakespeare's way. 
 
12 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 speare : ^ if one alien piece could be included in the bundle, 
 others might be. We have to look to the collective 
 character and the general significance of the mass. 
 
 Taking the mass as pretty certainly Shakespeare's, in 
 respect of the general unity of style, and assuming that 
 Chapman was the rival poet to whom they specially refer, 
 one accepts the conclusion that a number of them — it may 
 be many — are autobiographical. That all are so, or even that 
 all which are written in the first person are autobiographical 
 for Shakespeare, I am unable to believe. Even if we make 
 nothing of the curious parallels of phrase and idea between 
 some of them and French sonnets by Eonsard, Jodelle, and 
 others,^ we cannot at times escape an impression of vers 
 d' occasion. That some were written on behalf of, or at the 
 instance of, various personages, is the only theory by which 
 a number seem to be made intelligible; and the opinion 
 which finds "Mr. W. H." in WiUiam Harvey, the third 
 husband of Southampton's mother, suggests a number of 
 probabilities in the way of vicarious composition. It is 
 surely not difficult to imagine the most impersonal of all 
 dramatists writing " sugred sonnets for his private friends." 
 Nor is there any clear ground for assuming that the whole 
 series 1 to 126 are addressed to one person, and that a man. 
 I have never been able to believe that Sonnet 99, for 
 instance, was so addressed ; though it is notably elusive as 
 to the " love's " sex ; and from my first reading I have held 
 that Sonnet 55 is addressed to the author of some poem, and 
 refers to that. It is plainly a complimentary poem, meant 
 
 ■ It may be interesting to compare the lines above quoted with these 
 of Chapman : 
 
 Do not make 
 Those groundwor'ks of eternity you lay 
 Means to your ruin and short being here. 
 
 Sir Qilea Ooosecap, V. ii. 105-7. 
 The coincidence is rather curious. 
 
 ' Cp. Sir Sidney Lee, The French Renaissance in England, 1910, 
 p. 266 scq. 
 
THE "RIVAL POET" 13 
 
 to be prefaced to a book.^ " This powerful rhyme" cannot 
 mean the sonnet itself. " These contents " and " the living 
 record of your memory " must refer to a poem ; and the 
 concluding lines : 
 
 So, till the judgment that (?) yourself arise, 
 You live in this, and dwell in lover's eyes, 
 
 point to a poem dealing with love. Now, such a sonnet 
 might have been written either to or by Shakespeare.* If 
 to him, it would presumably refer to the Venus. " Power- 
 ful rhyme," however, would not be a very good description 
 of ■ the Venus ; and I am inclined to count the sonnet 
 Shakespearean, and to regard it as addressed to the author 
 of a poem about lovers. As this probability will concern 
 us later in our inquiry, it may be well to note here (1) the 
 possibility that it might have been addressed to Marlowe, 
 for his unfinished Heeo and Leander. Or again, to put a 
 hypothesis that at this stage will seem highly improbable, 
 it might (2) have been addressed to Chapman in respect of 
 his completion of that poem (which appears to have been 
 written several years before it was printed), and finally 
 either withheld or rejected, for reasons unknown. 
 
 However that may be, some of the Sonnets are intelligible 
 only as being autobiographical ; and among these all critics, 
 I think, are agreed in including Sonnets 76, 78, 80-86. 
 The poet would not write such sonnets to or for a poet. 
 And to seek to identify the rival poet is an inevitable 
 occupation for Shakespearean criticism. 
 
 Professor Mackail, though he suggests no name, and 
 speaks merely of the " unknown rival poet," was doubtless 
 aware of Minto's hypothesis put forward in 1885 in the 
 Chabactbbistics of English Pobtby (pp. 221-3) ; and of 
 Mr. Arthur Acheson's book on Shae:bspearb and the 
 
 ' Here again Mr. Samuel Butler had no misgivings. He was sure that 
 the sonnet was addressed to " Mr. W. H.," and described it as " appa- 
 rently suggested by the last line of the preceding sonnet." 
 
 ' There is also a possibility that it was written neither to nor by him. 
 
14 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 EiVAL Poet (1903), in which that hypothesis is accepted 
 and energetically developed. It may have been a sense of 
 the arbitrariness of a number of the steps in Mr. Acheson's 
 vigorous and ingenious argument that moved Professor 
 Mackail to leave the thesis alone ; and in this primary 
 investigation I have not founded upon Mr. Acheson's case 
 even when I agree with him, preferring a line of approach 
 which involves none of his assumptions. At times they 
 almost amount to begging the question, though to any one 
 who has gone carefully over the ground they are recognizably 
 inductions, whether or not licit. It is my hope that the 
 whole problem handled by him will emerge under a fuller 
 light when we have approached it by way of the present 
 investigation, and that even some of his more arbitrary 
 positions may then seem tenable, though some of his 
 conclusions certainly will not. 
 
 For the present, we may note that the help given by 
 Minto's hypothesis to Mr. Acheson in his attempt to solve 
 the problem of the Sonnets is something in its favour. On 
 its face, indeed, it is at once judicious and suggestive ; and 
 it was long ago accepted by many of us as by far the best 
 solution ever offered of the " rival poet " problem. The 
 " full proud sail of his great verse " ; the " spirit, by spirits 
 taught to write Above a mortal pitch " ; the ship " of tall 
 building and of goodly pride," contrasted with the " saucy 
 bark"; and the "affable familiar ghost, Which nightly 
 gulls him with intelligence," were all satisfactorily identified, 
 in the beginnings of Chapman's translations of the Iliad, 
 in the language of the Shadow op Night, and in the 
 theorem of the " heavenly familiar " set forth in the Dedica- 
 tion to that poem. To Minto's case may be added (1) the 
 item of the lines : 
 
 And, like unletter'd olerk, still cry "Amen" 
 To every hymn that able spirit affords, 
 In polish'd form of well-refined pen, 
 
 in Sonnet 85. The Shadow of Night consisted of two 
 
THE "RIVAL POET" 15 
 
 Hymns ; and " able " is an epithet often used by Chapman. 
 (2) Further, as was probably pointed out at the time of 
 Professor Minto's publication of his theory, Chapman in the 
 epilogue to his translation of the Iliad writes of " that 
 most assistful and unspeakable Spirit by whose thrice sacred 
 conduct and inspiration I have finished that labour." (8) 
 Yet further, in the Epistle Dedicatory to his part of Hero 
 AND Lbander he speaks of himself as " drawn by strange 
 instigation to employ some of my serious time in so trifling 
 a subject " ; and in his opening sestiad (the third) he has 
 the lines : 
 
 Then ho, most strangely intellectual fire, 
 
 That, proper to my soul, hast power t' inspure 
 
 Her burning faculties, and with the wings 
 
 Of thy unsphered flame visitest the springs 
 
 Of spirits immortal ! Now (as swift as Time 
 
 Doth follpw Motion) find th' eternal clime 
 
 Of his [Marlowe's] free soul, whose living subject stood 
 
 Up to the chin in the Pierian flood. . . . 
 
 Confer with it, and make my pledge as deep. 
 
 That neither's draught be consecrate to sleep. 
 
 (4) The idea of inspiring communion with " Spirits " seems 
 likely to have been a matter of talk with Chapman, so often 
 does he introduce it in his writings. Thus in the auto- 
 biographical Inductio to The Tears of Peace we have the 
 spiritual Homer or " Ghost " addressing and entrancing 
 the poet : 
 
 I brake into a trance, and then remain'd 
 
 Like him, an only soul 
 
 — such trance being " apt " to his temperament : 
 
 And thus I spake: "O thou that, blind, dost see 
 
 My heart and soul, what may I reckon thee, 
 
 Whose heavenly look shows not, nor voice sounds man ? " 
 
 "I am," said he, "that spirit Elysian 
 
 That in my native air, and on the hill 
 
 Next Hitchin's left hand, did thy bosom fill 
 
 With such a flood of soul, that thou wert fain, 
 
16 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 With exclamations of her rapture then, 
 
 To vent it to the echoes of the vale ; 
 
 When, meditating of me, a sweet gale 
 
 Brought me upon thee ; and thou didst inherit 
 
 My true sense, for the time then, in my spirit ; 
 
 And I, invisibly, went prompting thee 
 
 To those fair greens where thou didst English me." 
 
 (5) Finally, we have the verbal coincidence between 
 Shakespeare's lines : 
 
 Was it his spirit, by spirits taught to write 
 Above a mortal pitch, that struck me dead ? 
 
 and these in Chapman's version of the second Book of the 
 Iliad, 419-21 : 
 
 That great work, unless the seed of Jove, 
 The deathless Muses, undertake, maintains a pitch above 
 All mortal powers. 
 
 These lines, be it observed, do not occur in Chapman's first 
 version, published in 1598 : they appear only in the later 
 editions. The original rendering ran : 
 
 For only you the seed of Jove can tell the troops exact 
 That under lofty Ilion's walls employed revengeful fight. 
 
 As the revised version went into print only in 1609, we may 
 suppose that the sonnet proceeded upon spoken words of 
 Chapman — unless indeed we surmise that Chapman 
 amended his version after having seen the sonnet. A very 
 similar passage appears in 1609 in the Invocatio of The 
 Teaes of Peace : 
 
 And with the eagle's feathers deign to raise 
 The heavy body of my humble Muse, 
 That thy great Homer's spirit in her may use 
 Her topless flight and bear thy flame above 
 The reach of mortals and their earthly love. 
 
 And yet again we have in Sir Giles Goosecap (I. iv. 24) 
 the line : 
 
 And far above the pitch of my low plumes. 
 
THE "RIVAL POET" 17 
 
 So remarkable a set of data, in terms of the indications 
 given in the Sonnets, can be shown for no other proposed 
 identification. Fleay, always to be heard with heedful 
 respect on such problems, puts in a long and close argu- 
 ment ' the thesis that Gervase Markham was, " if not the 
 second poet, at any rate one of the alien pens alluded to." ' 
 The grounds are (1) that Markham's "Thyrsis and Daphne, 
 published five days after Venus and Adonis, and unfortu- 
 nately not extant, was no doubt written in rivalry thereof" ; 
 (2) that Markham's " Sm Kichard Gr-bnville, 1595, 
 September (just the date required), contains explanations 
 of most of the allusions to Southampton's 'eyes, virtue,' 
 etc. : and though his beauty is not mentioned, that may 
 have been descanted upon in the lost Thrysis " ; (3) that 
 Markham "was 'learned,' had 'proud sail' with a ven- 
 geance, and his poem was dictated by the ' spirit ' of 
 Grenville." (4) Markham ridicules Venus and Adonis 
 in The Dumb Knight, and the nearly identical words on 
 the subject in the Fair Maid op the Exchange (c. 1600) 
 go to indicate that he probably wrote that play also. Thus 
 he was a rival, and an antagonist. 
 
 The main strength of this case lies in the fact that one of 
 the four dedicatory sonnets to Markham's Grenville is 
 addressed to Southampton. It certainly justifies the sur- 
 mise that Markham is one of the " alien " pens of 
 Sonnet 78, which, however, says that the recipient's eyes 
 
 Have added feathers to the learned'e wing, 
 
 as well as 
 
 taught the dumb on high to Bing, 
 And heavy ignorance aloft to fly. 
 
 " Eude ignorance" the sonneteer takes to himself; but 
 Markham is hardly to be thought of as " the learned " in 
 respect of his work ; and Sonnets 80 and 86 point to some 
 
 ' Biog. Chroij. of the English Drama, ii. 208. 
 ' Ibid. p. 219, 
 
 3 
 
18 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 greater poet than he. " Full proud sail of his great verse " 
 does not truly describe Markham's poem, in which the 
 "Muse" is modest enough, and the style far from great; 
 while the invocation of Grenville's spirit does not cover the 
 
 affable fa/rmUar ghost 
 Which nightly gulls him with intelligence. 
 
 Furthermore, the allusions to Venus and Adonis in The 
 Dumb Knight and The Fair Maid of the Exchange 
 really do not amount to ridicule, and imply no hostility ; 
 while, on the other hand, Mr. Acheson confidently assumes ^ 
 that the second and fourth lines of Markham's sonnet to 
 Southampton, which begins : 
 
 Thou glorious laurel of the Muses' hUl, 
 Whose eye doth crown the most victorious pen ; 
 Bright lamp of virtue, in whose sacred skill 
 Lives all the bliss of ear-enchanting men, 
 
 are in direct allusion to Shakespeare, as the author of 
 Venus. And though there is no adequate warrant for 
 such confidence, the surmise cannot be ruled out. Such 
 conflicts of hypothesis are warnings against the snares of 
 our quest, in which we are apt to find ourselves " looking 
 in a dark room for a black hat that isn't there." 
 
 As Fleay goes on to avow, Drayton " would suit the 
 description of ' a better pen,' etc., better than Markham or 
 Harvey" — the other pair of candidates whom Fleay 
 favours. "The only missing link (a most important one)," 
 he adds, " is the absence of any dedicatory Sonnet to Lord 
 Southampton " ; and he suggests concerning Drayton that 
 "it seems possible that his suppressed Sonnet to L. S. 
 may have been addressed to L(ord) S(outhampton). . . . 
 Were this one link discovered I should undoubtedly pro- 
 nounce in favour of Drayton as the other poet. The 
 reason for Shakespeare's taking his Sonnets as a model 
 would be apparent at once." 
 
 But the difliculty would remain that Drayton does not 
 ' ShaJcesjieare and the Bival Poet, pp. 117, 128, 185. 
 
THE "RIVAL POET" 19 
 
 meet the particulars as to the " ghost," and the claim, " by 
 
 spirits taught to write Above a mortal pitch," while 
 
 Chapman meets them all, the " compeers by night " 
 
 included. It is true that we have from Chapman only the 
 
 one sonnet to Southampton, published with a number of 
 
 others at the end of the translation of the Iliad. But we 
 
 are really not limited to surviving dedicatory Sonnets for 
 
 the possibilities or probabilities of the case. Sonnet 80 
 
 tells that 
 
 a better spirit doth use your name, 
 And in the praise thereof spends all his might. 
 
 This description is satisfied by neither of the dedicatory 
 Sonnets under notice, and it points to something more 
 than a dedication, then an everyday thing. Chapman may 
 have written a number of early sonnets to Southampton ; 
 or, as Mr. Acheson contends, he may have praised him in 
 other ways : that Maecenas was evidently in considerable 
 request. Of rival poets in a general sense there were 
 several. Chapman's Ovid's Banquet of Sense (1595) 
 and Drayton's Endimion and Phcebe (1594) may both be 
 regarded as rival poems to the Venus and Adonis ; and we 
 may note the curious fact that Drayton in his dedicatory 
 sonnet to the Countess of Bedford has the line : 
 
 Upon whose ^J)m«e my soul shall spend her powers 
 
 — which makes to some extent for Fleay's hypothesis, as it 
 was notoriously Drayton's habit to change his patrons when 
 they dissatisfied him. But nothing can make good the lack 
 of the characteristics set forth in Sonnet 80, which seems to 
 tell not only of Chapman's mystical claims ^ but of the verse 
 
 ' A fairly plausible claim might be made for Daniel, who in his 
 MUSOPHIL0S, published in 1603, has obscure lines (976-8) on 
 
 The speech of heaven with whom they have commerce, 
 That only seems out of themselves removed. 
 And do with more than human skills converse. 
 On the release of Southampton after the accession of James, Daniel sent 
 him a high-pitched poetic Epistle. But the case for Daniel, as for 
 Drayton, is flimsy in comparison with that for Chapman. 
 
20 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 of his translation of the Iliad, first published in part in 
 1598, but probably seen in manuscript by Shakespeare 
 before publication, as it certainly would be by patrons. 
 Chapman repeatedly tells us that he had translated the 
 earlier books long before he went to press with them. In 
 that interval he would certainly circulate a copy. And if a 
 poem by Chapman were kept along with Shakespeare's 
 sonnets by somebody, it would be a point in favour of 
 the Chapman hypothesis. 
 
 On any view, if we are to find a solution, we must 
 proceed by hypothesis : and for no other identification 
 of the rival poet can such backing be found as for Minto's. 
 When, then, I recently met with Professor Mackail's 
 speculation, I at once gratefully recognized a probable 
 solution of the immediate problem, and very soon something 
 more — for the process of elucidation does not end with the 
 case of the Loveb's Complaint. But that was the starting- 
 point, and the first clear elucidation. Long occupied with 
 the problems of the plays, I had never closely studied this ; 
 and the moment one considered the hypothesis that Chapman 
 wrote the Complaint, its truth leapt to the eye. It needed 
 only a reperusal of Chapman to establish the proof. The 
 perverse diction, the concetti, the uncommon vocabulary, 
 the strong lines and the bad lines, nay, the final futility — 
 unless we are to say, the incompleteness — of the poem, 
 are all to be accounted for in Chapman. 
 
§ 2. THE STYLE OF THE "COMPLAINT" 
 
 Befoee coming to the proof-in-detail from diction and 
 vocabulary, it may be well to take a general view of the 
 style and method of the poem, as analysed by Professor 
 Mackail. Very justly, I think, he pronounces that 
 
 A Lover's Complaint is not the work of a beginner. Its style, alike 
 in its good and its bad points, is formed and even matured. After all 
 allowance has been made for Shakespeare's power for imitating the style 
 of other writers, and of anticipating his own later style in his earlier 
 work, it seems to me impossible to think of this poem as a work of his 
 youth, belonging to the period of Lucrbcb. It is either a work of his 
 later and matured period, or not a work of his at all. And what points 
 to its being not a work of his, is that the formal style is combined with 
 an intellectual weakness leading here and there to feeblenesses and 
 flatnesses. 
 
 This judgment is as sound as that of Mr. Samuel Butler is 
 uncritical. As to the maturity of the style, we have only to 
 compare the Complaint with Lucbece to perceive it. If 
 the former poem is youthful, what is the other ? I am less 
 disposed to assent to the further proposition that 
 
 There are passages in A Lovbr's Complaint which, while quite 
 Shakespearean in their quality, might have been written by any clever 
 versifier who had studied Shahespeare, and learned the trick so far as it 
 is a trick, such as 11. 155-6 : 
 
 But ah ! who ever shxmn'd by precedent 
 The destined ill she must herself assay ? 
 
 or 11. 183-4 : 
 
 All my offences that abroad you see 
 
 Are errors of the blood, none of the mind. 
 
 And there are others which distinctly give the impression of imitations 
 of Shakespeare by an inferior artist, like 1. 21 : 
 
 In clamours of all size both high and low ; 
 
22 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 or 11. 104-5 : 
 
 His rudeness so with his authoriz'd youth 
 Did livery falseness in a pride of truth ; 
 
 or the whole of the stanza about horsemanship (11. 106-12), if compared 
 
 with the well-known passage in Venus and Adonis, stanzas 44-50. . . . 
 
 Not only is the first line of this stanza incredibly flat, but the whole 
 
 stanza is poor and ragged. 
 
 The last criticism is quite just; but it is extremely 
 doubtful whether there is any imitation of Shakespeare in 
 the whole poem. The quasi- Shakespearean quality of some 
 lines is really but an " Elizabethan " quality ; and the theme 
 of horsemanship is particularly Elizabethan. As it happens, 
 the lines on the subject in the Complaint point rather 
 directly to Chapman. Compare : 
 
 Well could he ride, and often men would say 
 
 That horse his viettle from his rider takes : 
 
 Proud of subjection, noble by the sway : 
 
 What rounds, what bounds, what course, what stop he makes, 
 
 And controversy hence a question takes, 
 
 Whether the horse by him became his deed. 
 
 Or he his manage by the weU-doing steed, 
 
 with this passage from Bteon's Conspiracy, II. ii. 67 : 
 
 The Duke Byron on his brave beast Pastrana 
 
 Who sits him like a fuU-sail'd argosy 
 
 Danced with a lofty billow, and as snug 
 
 Plies to his bearer, both their motions mix'd; 
 
 And being considered in their site together, 
 
 They do the best present the state of man 
 
 In his first royalty ruling, and of beasts 
 
 In their first loyalty serving : one commanding, 
 
 And no way being mov'd ; the other serving 
 
 And no way being com,pelVd . . . 
 
 A doctrinal and witty hieroglyphic 
 
 Of a blest kingdom, to express and teach 
 
 Kings to command as they could serve, and subjects 
 
 To serve as if they had power to command. 
 
 The writer of the latter passage had evidently no need to 
 go to Shakespeare for the idea in the former — unless he is 
 to be supposed guilty of copying him in both cases. There 
 
THE STYLE OF THE "COMPLAINT" 23 
 
 is indeed a possibility that the copying was the other way 
 about. Shakespeare apparently did some copying in this 
 very connection. His description of the horse in the Venus, 
 held by some to have been necessarily borrowed from 
 Sylvester's then unpublished translation of Du Bartas,^ 
 might with more probability be inferred to come from an 
 earlier English document. The matter is of no great 
 importance, but it may be worth a passing notice. 
 Shakespeare's horse is 
 
 Round-hoof d, short-jointed, fetlocks shag and long, 
 Broad breast, full eye, small head, and nostril wide, 
 High crest, short ears, straight legs, and passing strong. 
 Thin mane, thick tail, broad buttock, tender hide. 
 
 Venus and Adonis, U. 295-8. 
 
 All such descriptions point back to Xenophon On Horse- 
 manship, and to Virgil's lines : 
 
 Illi ardua cervix, 
 Argutumque caput, brevis alvus, obesaque terga ; 
 Luxuriatque toris animosum pectus . . . 
 Densa juba, et dextro jactata recumbit in armo ; 
 At duplex agitur per lumbos spina; cavatque 
 Tellurem et solido graviter sonat ungula comu 
 
 (Georgics, iii. 79-88) 
 
 — which follow in detail either Xenophon or the older 
 treatise of Simon. Du Bartas certainly had these lines — and 
 probably also Xenophon — in view, stipulating as he does for 
 the double eschine, while adding many other points. For 
 the densa juba he substitutes un long poil crespement 
 epandu ; ^ and Sylvester in turn specified 3 " a long thin 
 curled mane." Before Du Bartas, however, the Spanish 
 Guevara had inserted in orje of his epistles a description 
 
 " Sir Sidney Lee thinks Shakespeare may have seen the original 
 {French Benaissance, p. 337). 
 
 " La seconds Sepmaine de G. de Saluste, sieur du Bartas, Paris, 1610, 
 p. 142. {Les Artifices, Jour I.) 
 
 3 Sylvester's Du Bartas, The Handicrafts, ed. 1613, p. 286, 
 
24 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 of the ideal horse, thus Englished by Edward Hellowes in 
 his version of 1584 : 
 
 A Idgh crest, hair to the ground, slit nostrils, sure hoofed, well mem- 
 bered, broad buttoclts, a long tail, great eyes, a soft sTci/n, and above all, 
 of courage marvellous fierce. 
 
 The Familiar Epistles of Ouevara, 1584, p. 128. 
 
 It will be noted that nine of the items correspond more or 
 less closely to those in Shakespeare's picture, to say 
 nothing of the " courage " ; while the " thin mane " is 
 special to Shakespeare and Sylvester. But Sylvester's 
 translation of Du Bartas's " Second Week " appeared only 
 in 1598 ; whereas there was published in 1595, in the same 
 volume with Ovid's Banquet op Sense, Chapman's (or 
 rather Stapleton's ') Contention of Phillis and Floba, a 
 rendering of an old Latin poem, formerly ascribed to 
 Walter Mapes; and there (stt. 56, 57) we have this 
 description of Flora's palfrey : — 
 
 His mane thin-hair'd, his neck high-crested, 
 Small ear; short head, and burly-hreasted. 
 
 His broad back stoop'd to this clerk's loved . . . 
 Straight-legged, large thigh'd, and hollow-hoov'd. 
 
 Here we have eight correspondences with Shakespeare's list, 
 which however includes additional items found in Guevara's, 
 whereof one (" soft skin ") is absent from Sylvester's, as 
 
 ' In 1598 the poem was separately reprinted as the work of " B. S. 
 Esquire." As Eiohard Stapleton prefixed commendatory verses to 
 Chapman's volume in 1595, Sir Sidney Lee justifiably surmises that 
 Fhillis and Flora is really the work of Stapleton {French Benaissa/nce, 
 p. 467, note) ; and as Chapman later (pref. to trans, of Iliad) speaks 
 of Stapleton as " my most ancient, learned, and right noble friend . . . 
 first most desertful mover in the frame of our Homer," the conjecture 
 seems established by Chapman's acquiescence in the re-issue of the 
 poem, which, further, disappears from the 1639 reprint of Chapman's 
 volume. It may well have been, however, tliat Chapman had some 
 small share in the translation ; and as in any case its vocabulary was 
 known to Chapman, it will hereinafter be occasionally adduced. Some 
 of its WQrds are specialties of his, 
 
THE STYLE OF THE "COMPLAINT" 25 
 
 from his original. The " high crest " occurs alike in 
 Guevara, Shakespeare, and Chapman, where Sylvester 
 merely has " a crested neck," and Du Bartas col nwllement 
 vousti. 
 
 Now, the translator of Phillis and Flora is following 
 his original. He prints only a part of it at the end of his 
 version : but in the complete poem De Phillide et Flora 
 we have : 
 
 Cervix fuit ardua, sparsa coma leve, 
 
 auris parva, prominens pectus, caput breve . . . 
 
 pede cavo, tibia recta, largo crure. 
 
 Poems attribtited to Walter Mapes, ed. Wright, 1841, 
 
 p. 264, 11. 203-4-7. 
 
 So that the " thin mane " had four hundred years before 
 been imposed on the Virgilian ardua cervix, though it was 
 not adopted by Du Bartas. It seems as likely as not that 
 there was current some general and variously detailed 
 description of the ideal horse,' including all the old items, 
 seeing that Shakespeare's " fetlocks shag and long " point 
 to Guevara's "hair to the ground"; while his "short- 
 jointed" recalls the "short pasterns" of Du Bartas, and 
 his " thin mane " points to the version of Mapes. The 
 natural presumption is that Sylvester had either seen such 
 a general description or had taken his "thin mane" from 
 Shakespeare or Chapman-Stapleton, rather than that 
 Shakespeare had so early seen Sylvester's translation in 
 manuscript. 
 
 On the other hand, it is rather likely that Shakespeare 
 may have seen the version of Phillis and Flora in 
 manuscript before writing the Venus, Chapman being, 
 ex hypothesi, his " rival " for the patronage of Southampton. 
 The Shadow op Nighx, we know, had been read by 
 
 ' Compare, for instance, Jonson's description in Bartholomew Fair, 
 iv. iii. I have seen two treatises on horsemanship published in 1584 
 (one of which has been wrongly described as a translation of Xenophon), 
 but in neither is there a list of " points," 
 
26 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Marlowe, who died in 1593; and the translation of the 
 Latin poem is Hkely enough to have been in existence some 
 time before its publication. In any case, it is not Chapman- 
 Stapleton who imitate Shakespeare, for there has not been 
 added to the original any of the items which Shakespeare 
 took from Guevara, or from the longer description which 
 we have supposed to be current. 
 
 For the rest, most students of Chapman will probably 
 agree that it is unnecessary to surmise on his part any 
 imitation of Shakespeare's style to account for such lines as 
 those cited by Professor Mackail. The seven-line stanza- 
 form, indeed, is that of The Eape op Luceece ; and the 
 very first line suggests that that poem was the cue; but 
 beyond this there is nothing that can be called copying. 
 LucBECE, in fact, was modelled as to stanza-form, and 
 partly as to sentiment, on Daniel's Complaint op Eosamond 
 (1592), as the Venus was suggested by Lodge's Glaucus 
 AND SciLLA (1589). But the Lover's Complaint is no 
 more an imitation of the Luceece than of the poem of 
 Daniel. Eather, we shall see ground for thinking, it is an 
 attempt to eclipse the Luceece by a far more elaborate 
 technique ; and if it was written near in time to that poem 
 there was simply no " mature" Shakespeare style in exist- 
 ence to copy. If it was written ten years later, when 
 Shakespeare had formed the style which we call Shake- 
 spearean, the author, supposing him to have imitated that, 
 would- be putting his spiced wine into an old bottle, into 
 which Shakespeare had once poured a quite unsophisticated 
 fluid. 
 
 But the theory is in any case supererogatory. The style 
 is just Chapman's own. The very use of "precedent," 
 with the force of " warning example," is one of his habits 
 of phrase: the line about errors of blood, not of mind, is 
 one of his oftenest reiterated tags. The better lines of the 
 Complaint he has often surpassed : never does he go very 
 far without a strong stroke. Many of his lines, had they 
 
THE STYLE OF THE "COMPLAINT" 27 
 
 occurred in a play of Shakespeare's, would have passed 
 without suspicion, as would many of Jonson's, to name no 
 lesser men. In Chapman's section of Hero and Leander 
 alone there are plenty of this quality, e.g. : 
 
 When bees make wax, Nature doth not intend 
 It shall be made a torch ; but we that know 
 The proper virtue of it, make it so. . . . 
 
 Thus 'gainst our grief, not cause of grief, we fight : 
 The right of nought is glean'd, but the deU^t. 
 
 So ebb'd and flowed the blood in Eucharis' face : 
 Coyness and love strived which had greatest grace. 
 
 Action is fiery valour's sovereign good. 
 
 Being used aright, the use of time is fate. 
 
 Joy, graven in sense, like snow in water, wastes : 
 Without preserve of virtue, nothing lasts. 
 
 But custom, that the apoplexy is 
 
 Of bed-rid natures and lives led amiss. 
 
 And takes away all feeling of offence. 
 
 Yet brazed not Hero's brow with impudence. . . . 
 
 — the last a cue to Shakespeare.^ The same thought occurs 
 in BussY D'Ambois, V. iv. 181 : 
 
 Custom had benumb'd 
 All sense of scruple and all note of frailty. 
 
 The sententious manner is just as much Chapman's as 
 Shakespeare's, being indeed pre-Shakespearean.^ Equally 
 Chapman's own are the faults. Every blemish in the 
 Complaint can be matched in The Shadow of Night, in 
 Ovid's Banquet of Sense, in Hero and Lbandbb. The 
 faults, as Professor Mackail sees, are the faults not of an 
 
 ' "If damned custom have not brass'dit so." — Hamlet, III. iv. 37. 
 
 ' Lieut.-Colonel Cunningham, in his meritorious edition of Marlowe, 
 suggests (p. 352) that certain " saws of might " in Chapman's part of 
 Hero and Leander are " not the least in Chapman's style," and must be 
 Marlowe's. This is a complete mistake. Chapman has dozens of such 
 sententious dicta. 
 
28 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 unformed but of an ill-formed style : they occur in 
 Chapman's earliest signed work, and they recur in 
 Eugenia, and in the last sad diatribe against Ben Jonson. 
 They are the inveterate faults of a powerful artist who never 
 attained the crowning grace of finish, sustained ease, 
 limpidity ; who could never abstain from doing violence to 
 diction to get a rhyme or a measure ; and who was of all the 
 great Elizabethans the most irredeemable victim to the 
 snare of the " conceit." The man who could put in 
 Andeomeda Libeeata the line : 
 
 And now came roaring to the tied, the Tide, 
 
 repeating a stale pun of Lilly's, already utilized in The 
 Two Gentlemen of Veeona, was capable of every fatuity 
 in the Complaint. 
 
 But Professor Mackail, faithfully facing every plea that 
 can be made for Shakespeare's authorship, offers these 
 concessions : 
 
 On the other hand, there are more than a few passages in the poem 
 which are like Shakespeare at his best, and of which one would say at 
 first sight that no one but Shakespeare could have written them, so 
 wonderfully do they combine his effortless power and his incomparable 
 sweetness. I need only cite three or four instances (11. 14, 146-7, 237-8 
 288-9) : 
 
 Some beauty peep'd through lattice of sear'd age. 
 
 Threw my affections in his charmed power, 
 Beserv'd the stalk, and gave him all my flower. 
 
 But kept cold distance, and did thence remove. 
 To spend her living in eternal love. 
 
 O father, what a hell of witchcraft lies 
 In the small orb of one particular tear. 
 
 The last passage, as Shakespearean in its concentrated weight of 
 passion as in its exquisiteness of rhythm and phrasing, contains a 
 striking verbal likeness to a phrase in Sonnet 120 ; and this is only one 
 out of several : we may compare the use of oblation, 1. 223, and 
 gpnnet 125; "hqardiwhere his plants in others' orchards grew," 1. 171; 
 
THE STYLE OF THE "COMPLAINT" 29 
 
 and Sonnet 16 ; " glaz'd with crystal gate the glowing roses," I. 286, and 
 Sonnet 5.' These and other lines if quoted carry the mind instinctively 
 to the Sonnets. . . . They suggest that if the author of A Lover's 
 Complaint was not the author of the Sonnets, he had read them, or 
 some of them, when he wrote the poem. 
 
 It is after these very liberal allowances that Professor 
 Mackail sums up : " Yet on a large view the style and 
 evolution of A Lover's Complaint must be set down as 
 not characteristically Shakespearean, and as in some 
 respects characteristically un-Shakespearean. A certain 
 laboriousness, a certain cramped, gritty, discontinuous 
 quality, affects it subtly but vitally throughout." I would 
 not merely press this verdict : I would respectfully challenge 
 the claims made for the lines cited. The last two are of 
 course the " Shakespearean " lines of the poem ; and they 
 do suggest the "hell of time" in Sonnet 120, and the " Siren 
 tears, Distilled from limbecks foul as hell," in Sonnet 119. 
 But then Chapman has not merely a number of expressions 
 such as " hells of misery " (HoM. Hymn to Apollo) and 
 " what a hell was heaven in " (Hero and Leander, V. 
 Tale op Teras), and such lines as: 
 
 Still to be constant in hell's blackest reign. 
 
 And toss'd distress'd Leander, being in hell. 
 As high as heaven. 
 
 I must describe the hell of my disease. 
 
 Id. vi. 170 ; 
 
 Id. ib. 182 ; 
 Id. ib. 142 ; 
 
 —four " hell " metaphors in one poem, and three in one 
 
 canto : he has in The Gentleman Usher (IV. iv. 54) 
 
 the saying : 
 
 an old wife's eye 
 Is a blue crystal full of sorcery ; 
 
 which points from another side to the image in the CoM- 
 
 ' I may note that this has long been for me a doubtful sonnet. It 
 certainly has something of the manner of the Complaint. — J. M. K. 
 
30 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 PLAINT. The " particular" also, we shall see, is a common 
 Chapmanism, as is " orb." But not only are the lines 
 Chapman-like : they are un- Shakespearean in their setting ; 
 the sequel 
 
 But with the inundation of the eyes 
 What rocky heart to water will not wear ? 
 
 being' a hopeless anti-cHmax.^ Nor is " sear'd age " a 
 tolerable figure of the face of a sorrowing maiden. As for 
 the stalk-and-flower figure, that too is one of Chapman's. 
 Compare : 
 
 Sufler'd such a delicious flower to perish in the stalTc. 
 
 The Widow's Tears, 11. iv. 
 
 Honour, what's that ? your second maidenhead : 
 And what is that ? a word : the word is gone ; 
 The thing remains : the rose is pluck'd, the stalk 
 Abides. 
 
 Bussy D'Ambois, II. ii. 10, ed. Parrott ; Shepherd, p. 1506. 
 
 And again the use is un-Shakespearean, un-poetic. 
 Burns, handling the same trope, makes the false lover 
 steal the rose and leave the thorn, which is better; and 
 that figure is used by Shakespeare in All's Well, 
 IV. i. 19. 
 
 But on the other hand. Chapman was perfectly capable of 
 all the poetry there is in the Complaint. He could write : 
 
 And all this while the red sea of her blood 
 Ebb'd with Leander. 
 
 No pen can anything eternal write 
 
 That is not steeped in humour of the Night. 
 
 Love is a golden bubble, full of dreams, 
 
 That waking breaks, and fills us with extremes. 
 
 When in the oak's green arms the cuckoo sings 
 And first delights men in the lovely springs. 
 
 ' This may be said to echo two weak lines (591-2) in Lucreue, but 
 those are not nearly so bad. 
 
THE STYLE OF THE "COMPLAINT" 31 
 
 Who, in short, that has ever studied him, will deny that he 
 can at times sing with effortless ease and perfect felicity of 
 phrase and rhythm? I confess I cannot see much 
 " passion " in the wire-drawn discourse of the deserted 
 maiden ; but, such as it is, it is surely within the compass 
 of the author of Bussy D'Ambois, or, for that matter, of 
 the author of The Widow's Tbaes. 
 
§ 3. MARKS OF CHAPMAN 
 
 He who will but grant that modest premiss may now 
 proceed to note the hundred-and-one reasons for thinking 
 that Chapman did write the Complaint. To begin with, 
 some of the apparatus poeticus has been used by him else- 
 where ; and as it is there ostensibly more naturally placed, 
 the presumption is that this poem is the later. In the 
 Complaint, the distressed maiden sits with a " maund " by 
 her side, from which she extracts " a thousand favours." 
 Maund is an old word, found twice in the Bible of 1561, and 
 later in Hall and Herrick, but never in Shakespeare — apart 
 from the Complaint. It happens to be used by Chapman 
 (tr. of Odyssey, VI. 105). But he also duplicates his 
 picture. In Hbbo and Leandee (iv. 96), Hero does a 
 piece of embroidery in which there figures 
 
 A country virgin keeping of a vine. . . . 
 And by her lay her scrip that nourish'd her ; 
 
 vine and scrip being both plundered by foxes ; whereby 
 Hero " did her soul express " — 
 
 To show what death was hid in love's disguise. 
 
 The seducer, again, is a duplicate of the portraits of Leander 
 and Hymen : — 
 
 Small show of man was yet upon his ohin, 
 His phoenix down began but to appear 
 Like unshorn velvet on that termless skin; 
 
MARKS OF CHAPMAN 33 
 
 and 
 
 He did in the general bosom reign 
 Of young, of old; and eexes both enchanted . . . 
 Many there were that did his picture get 
 To serve their eyes, and in it put their mind. 
 
 So, in Heeo and Lbandbe, Hero deligHts in her lover's 
 picture; and others afterwards do the same; 
 
 After thiB accident . . . 
 Th' inhabitants of Sestos and Abydos 
 Did every year, with feasts propitious, 
 To fair Leander's picture sacrifice; 
 And they were persons of especial price 
 That were allow'd it, as an ornament 
 T' enrich their houses. 
 
 Again we have in the fifth sestiad : 
 
 the downless rosy faces 
 Of youths and maids; 
 
 and in the Tale of Teras, Hymen 
 
 Of Athens was a youth so sweet of face 
 That many thought him of the female race . . . 
 For only now his chin's first down consorted 
 His head's rich fleece, in golden curls contorted. 
 
 The figure doubtless comes from Homer (II. xxiv. 847), 
 "vdth the first down on his chin," or, as Chapman renders 
 it, " first-down-chinn'd " (xxiv. 807). The false one in the 
 Complaint, further, gets "browny locks ... in crooked 
 curls," curls being among Chapman's favourite properties : 
 
 Her [Hero's] plenteous hair in curled bUlows swims 
 On her bright shoulder. 
 
 The Levant Sea 
 On whose ourl'd head the glowing sun doth rise. 
 
 His [Neptune's] brackish curls. 
 
 The green-hair'd Hellespont broke in silver curls. 
 'Gainst Hero's tower. 
 
 Whose [the, Sun's] ardour curl'd -the foreheads of the trees. 
 
 Ovid's Banquet. 
 
 3 
 
34 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 [The morning] deck'd all with curl'd clouds. 
 
 Andromeda, 
 
 Lodged in that fleece of hair, yellow and cnrled. 
 
 The Amoroui Zodiac (no " curl'd " in the original). 
 
 " Crooked," again, in the sense of " curved," is a constant 
 epithet of Chapman's. Never does Shakespeare, apart from 
 this poem, apply that epithet to a curl. Out of a dozen 
 uses of the vford in the Concordance, there is but one 
 instance with the possible force of " curling " (" crooked 
 smokes " in Cymbelinb — where there arises another 
 problem), and one with the force of " curved " — " crooked 
 figure" in the first prologue to Hbnet V, a highly 
 problematic item to be dealt with later. The normal 
 meaning of the word in Shakespeare is always " bent," 
 morally or physically, and its application is usually disparag- 
 ing. But with Chapman the normal meaning is "curved."- 
 With him bows are always crooked; eagles and vultures 
 have " crooked beaks," and " crooked seres " ; the snail 
 makes "crooked mazes"; winding streams are crooked; 
 ships are " crookt-stemed " ; an ox's horn is " crookt " ; 
 even a scythe is so described. He has the moral application 
 also, and speaks of crooked age ; but for him normally the 
 crooked is the curved. 
 
 And the clues continue. Of the seducer in the Complaikt 
 his victim tells that 
 
 Love lacked a dwelling, and made him her place ; 
 And when in his fair parts she did abide 
 She was new lodged and newly deified — 
 
 which is exactly what happens to Hymen in the Tale of 
 Teras. It seems probable that the bad lover was modelled 
 on the good ones, not vice versa. But this is not thus far 
 certain, and the question is still left open when we have 
 noted the correspondence between the deserted one's 
 "napkin," 
 
 Which on it had conceited characters, 
 
MARKS OF CHAPMAN 35 
 
 and the "conceited scarf" of Hero (iv. 76). " Characters," 
 in this (the usual Elizabethan) sense, is a frequent word in 
 Chapman : 
 
 In whose white circle Love writ all his charms, 
 And made his characters sweet Hero's limbs. 
 
 Id. iii. 99. 
 
 A rich disparent pentacle she wears 
 Drawn full of circles and strange characters. 
 
 Id. ih. 124. 
 
 Charms made of unlearned characters are not consecrate 
 by the Muses. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to Ovid's Banquet. 
 
 Wherein was writ, in sable charactery. . . . 
 
 Ovid's Banqtiet, st. 71. 
 
 And those strange characters, writ in his face. 
 
 Byron's Conspiracy, I. i, 170. 
 
 Certain magic characters in an unlawful book. 
 
 The Widow's Tears, I. ii. 119. 
 
 Thou dost bear thy wounds upon thee 
 In wide and spacious characters. 
 
 The Admiral of France, V. iii. 45. 
 
 We can now be fairly sure that we are reading Chapman, 
 but not yet that the Complaint is later than Hbbo and 
 Lbandbr. 
 
 Before coming to the items of syntax and vocabulary, 
 rightly stressed by Professor Mackail as the data on which 
 a critical investigation must turn, it may be well to deal 
 with one line in which diction and thought together are to 
 be traced to Chapman in an interesting way. Professor 
 Mackail is generous enough to say that such lines as : 
 
 Her grievance with his hearing to divide, 
 and 
 
 That maidens' eyes stuck over all his face, 
 
 " are Shakespearean enough, though we may doubt whether 
 
36 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Shakespeare would have written them without a smile." I 
 confess I am unable to conceive Shakespeare writing either, 
 in any mood ; and I am reasonably sure that he did not. 
 Both the Unes (80-1) : 
 
 Of one by nature's outwards so commended, 
 That maidens' eyes stuck over all his face, 
 
 can be confidently traced to Chapman. The second is 
 perhaps not quite so mad as it looks. The idea is that the 
 beauty of the face at every point arrested the " arrows " of 
 love-struck maidens' eyes ; and the unhappy diction came 
 of Chapman's proclivity to the verb " to stick," one of the 
 many touches of vernacular with which he counterpoised 
 his Latinism and neologism. Shakespeare has it often, but 
 Chapman far oftener. For instances : 
 
 But D'Ambois's sword . . . 
 
 Shot like a pointed comet at the face 
 
 Of manly Barrisor; and there it stuck. 
 
 Busty D'Amboia, II. i. 88. 
 
 A tale so worthy, and so fraught with wonder, 
 Sfickt in my jaws. 
 
 My hand {stuck full of laurel). 
 
 Y'ave stuck us up a very worthy flag. 
 
 O thou great Prince of shades where never sun 
 Sticks his far-darted beams. 
 
 Id. ib. 1. 31. 
 
 Id. III. ii. 124. 
 
 Id. ib. 1. 140. 
 
 Id. V. iii. 48. 
 
 And like a loathsome wen 
 Sticks to the face of nature and this court. 
 
 Byron's Tragedy, V. ii. 148. 
 
 And lightning sticks 'twixt heaven and earth amaz'd. 
 
 Id. V. iu. 67. 
 
 Sir, if my loyalty stick in him no faster 
 
 But that the light breath of report may loose it. 
 
 Id. III. i. 174. 
 
MARKS OF CHAPMAN 37 
 
 Knees bent too late, 
 Stick you in eartli like statues. 
 
 Id. V. end. 
 
 HeU 
 Siuch fuU of inward horrors, never lighted. 
 
 Bussy D'Ambois, IV. ii. 23. 
 
 Like a falling star 
 Silently glanced, that like a thunderbolt 
 Looked to have atttck and shook the firmament. 
 
 Id. V. iv. 146, 
 
 Whom on his hair-plum'd helmet's crest the daft first smote, 
 
 then ran 
 Into his forehead and there stuoJc. 
 
 Trans, of lUad, iv. 488. 
 
 And as a poplar shot aloft, set by a river side . , . 
 Sticks there. . . . 
 
 Id. iv. 528. 
 
 Whole storms of lances, large and sharp, of which a number 
 
 ttvxik 
 In his rough shield. 
 
 Id. V. 618. 
 
 Here we have two of the tic-words of the Complaint in one 
 line. " Stuck " and " storm " occur again repeatedly in the 
 thirteenth and fourteenth books, and " stuck " is found all 
 through Chapman's poetry : 
 
 As thou putt'st handles to the Thespian bowls. 
 Or stucVst rich plumes La the Palladian casque. 
 
 In Sejcmwm Ben Jonsoni. 
 
 Sticks in his blazing forehead like a star. 
 
 Fragment of the Tears of Peace. 
 
 And in his [Phoebus'] brow 
 A torch of pitch stuck, lighting half the skies. 
 
 Epicedium (ed. Shepherd, p. 1782i). 
 
 And in her cold lips stick astonisb'd sounds. 
 
 Id. p. 174a. 
 
 The golden age, starlike shot through our sky, 
 Aim'd at his pomp renew'd, and stuck in's eye I 
 
 Id. E^pitaxihium. 
 
38 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 And lightning ttucJc 'twixt heaven and earth amaz'd. 
 
 Andromeda Liberata, 
 
 Shoots his [the sun's] vented rays 
 Far off, and sticTcs them in some little glade. 
 
 Epist. Bed. to Earl of Somerset, pref. to Odysseyt. 
 
 Stuck her tender knees 
 
 Amidst the soft mead. 
 
 Horn. Hymn to Apollo. 
 
 Finally, " all over " or " over all" is one of his modes : 
 
 StucTe all over with roses. 
 
 Annot. 7 on trans, of Musaeus. 
 
 He smote the upper part 
 Of all his skull. 
 
 Trans, of Iliad, viii. 70. 
 
 All over her she blush'd. 
 
 Trans, of Mussens. 
 
 In this last- cited piece the operation of the " maiden's 
 eyes " is further explained by the lines : 
 
 But with the flaming arrows of her eyes 
 
 Wounded unwares . . . 
 
 But now the love-brand in his eye-beams burned. 
 
 And this idea we have again in The Bevbngb of Bussy 
 D'Ambois (I. i. 102) : 
 
 Wooing as freshly as when first love shot 
 His faultless arrows from her rosy eyes ; 
 
 and yet again, earlier, in the Blind Bbggab of Alexandria 
 (near end) : 
 
 Po. Love's darts are swift as is the lightning fire. 
 Bhe. See, he shoots arrows burning from her eyes. 
 
 Thus the notion of the " stuck " line is seen to be 
 Chapman's, and the phraseology is also his. He clearly 
 found nothing cacophonous or undignified in the word ; 
 
MARKS OF CHAPMAN 39 
 
 nor, it seems, did his contemporaries.' In his rendering of 
 the Homeridian Hymn to Aphrodite we are told how the 
 eyes of the goddess " stuck " on the couch of Anchises ; and 
 the last line of his version of the thirteenth book of the 
 Iliad runs : 
 
 They reach'd the splendours stuck about the unreach'd throne of 
 Jove. 
 
 I could give thirty more instances : there are five in the 
 thirteenth Iliad alone, three in the fifteenth, four in the 
 sixteenth, and three in the seventeenth. 
 
 Similarly we may note Chapman's habit in the use of 
 "particular," "outwards," and " sear'd." These are of 
 course not now- Shakespearean words: "particular" and 
 " outward " (not the plural form) were common in 
 Elizabethan diction ; and Shakespeare often uses them. I 
 merely note that "particular" and "outward" are still 
 more frequent in Chapman than in Shakespeare, the latter 
 being one of his tics : 
 
 Insight illustrates: outward bravery blinds. 
 
 Sliadow of Night. 
 
 With eyes turn'd upward, and was outward blind ; 
 But inward, past and future things he saw. 
 
 Tears of Peace : Inductio. 
 
 Like to incense the outward war again. 
 
 Id. ib. 
 
 Overshoot 
 Their true- sought inward peace for outward boot. 
 
 Tears of Peace, ed. Shepherd, p. 121a. 
 
 Whose outward rapture made me inward bleed. 
 
 Id. end. 
 
 Long before, Surrey has : 
 
 In her breast 
 Imprinted stack his words. 
 
 Trans, of ith Mneid, 6-6. 
 
40 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Nor is possessed 
 With any outward state, but makes him blest 
 That governs inward. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to Prince Henry. 
 
 And outward paintings only prank up sin. 
 
 Hymn to Christ upon the Cross. 
 
 Your judgment from the inward state required 
 To blaze the outward. 
 
 Sonnet ded. to Lord Bochester. 
 
 Things outward therefore think no further yours 
 Than they yield homage to your inward powers. 
 
 Eugenia, p. 334a, ed. Shepherd. 
 
 ye Greeks, in name and outward rite 
 But princes only, not in act. 
 
 Trans, of lUad, V. 788. 
 
 'Tis not this outward beauty's ruthful loss. 
 
 Qentleman Usher, V. i. 
 
 Love must have outward objects to delight him. 
 
 Id. ib. 
 
 He turns his outward love to inward hate. 
 
 Bussy D'Ambois, III. i. 
 
 Without the outward patches of our frailty 
 
 Biches and honours. 
 
 Id. ib. 
 
 You can never find 
 Things outward care, but you neglect the mind. 
 
 Bevenge of Bussy, III. i. 
 
 These idle outward things. 
 
 Id. ib. 
 
 Huge heaps of outside. 
 
 Id. I. i. 
 
 The proudest outside. 
 
 Id. ib. 
 
 To love nothing outward. 
 
 Id. IV. i. 
 
 Sleep, which binds both the outward senses 
 And the sense common too. 
 
 Id. V. i. 
 
MARKS OF CHAPMAN 41 
 
 Modesty . . . should be painted true 
 With modest out-paria. 
 
 Id. I. i. 
 
 These painted men 
 All set on outaide. 
 
 Id. II. i. 
 
 Outward maims. 
 
 CcBsar and Pomjpsy, I. i. 
 
 Men's merely outward and false peace. 
 
 Tean of Peace. 
 
 Perhaps some sacred Godhead goes enclos'd 
 Even in his abject outside. 
 
 nth Odyssey, 645. 
 
 For all his gay outside. 
 
 Humorous Day's Mirth, Sc. viii. 190. 
 
 If tears, which so abundantly distil 
 Out of my inward eyes, and for a need 
 Can drown these outward. 
 
 All Fools, IV. i. 86. 
 
 Again, he uses the noun " inwards " with the correlative 
 force : 
 
 On each side, dogs, of gold and silver fram'd, 
 
 The house's guard stood ; which the Deity lam'd [Hephaistos] 
 
 With knowing inwards had inspired. 
 
 7th Odyssey, 126. 
 
 His view 
 Prov'd after, that his inwards were too rough 
 For such bold usage. 
 
 9th Odyssey, 327. 
 
 And most for man's use Mercury (whom good wise imwards 
 grace). 
 
 20th Iliad, 34. 
 
 And to match " outwards " in the physical sense we have : 
 
 And all the inwards put to spit. 
 
 Achilles' Shield. 
 
 Which done, the inwards slit, 
 
 They broil'd on coals and eat. 
 
 Trans, of Iliad, ii. 371. 
 
42 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 So with particular : 
 
 All acts that seem 
 111 in particular respects, are good 
 As they respect your universal rule. 
 
 Bevenge of Busty, II. i. 35. 
 
 Fifty gentlemen . . . with footmen particularly attending. 
 
 Mask of the Middle Temple. 
 
 There is no poem nor oration so general but hath his one particular 
 proposition. 
 
 Defence app. to Mask. 
 
 For any motion of particular justice. 
 
 Ceesar and Pompey, I. i. 121. 
 
 Every man is so loaded with his particular head. 
 
 Pref. to Header, with complete lUad. 
 
 And yet Sarpedon seconds him, with this particular taunt. 
 
 Trans, of Iliad, v. 454. 
 
 His particular grudge. 
 
 Id. ib. 700. 
 
 One particular side. 
 
 Id. vi. 5. 
 
 More particular terms. 
 
 Id. ib. 147. 
 
 And, that I his general beauty cannot stand 
 Without these stains in the particular man. 
 
 BuBsy D'Avibois, V. i.;182. 
 
 These particular tears of unVented anger in Achilles are in him most 
 natural. 
 
 Comm. on B. i. of Iliads : note on 1. 360. 
 
 Turning all 
 Particular to the pleasure 'general. 
 
 Eugenia, Vig. 2. 
 
 Each 'particular miss. 
 
 Id. Vig. 3. 
 
 The particular tame. 
 
 Trans, of Odyssey, xi. 690. 
 
 But fierce assistants of particular fear. 
 
 Id. xii. 112. 
 
MARKS OF CHAPMAN 43 
 
 This I simply told 
 To each particular. 
 
 You sons and daughters in particular state. 
 In public roofs with our particular life. 
 
 In particular then 
 I told our pilot. 
 
 Id. ib. 248. 
 
 Id. xiii. 79. 
 
 Id. six. 167. 
 
 Id. ib. 243. 
 
 Their own particular wealth or honour. 
 
 CcBiar and Pom/pey, I. i. 93. 
 
 His own particular ends. 
 
 Id. I. ii. 223. 
 
 Particular men particular fates must bear. 
 
 Id. III. 8. 
 
 And not entitle it particularly 
 To your acceptance. 
 
 Dedication to All Fools. 
 
 " Sere," finally, is one of his common words for " dry " (as 
 " sere wood "), and he has " seared " in The Widow's 
 Tbabs, V. iii. 93. 
 
§ 4. SYNTAX 
 
 As to syntax, Professor Mackail notes three specialties of 
 the Complaint: 
 
 (1) Ellipsis of subject : 
 
 I. 5. Ere long [I] espied a fickle maid full pale. 
 1. 272. And [it] sweetens, in the suffering pangs it bears. 
 1. 312. And, veil'd in them, [he] did win whom he would 
 maim. 
 
 (2) Ellipsis of verb : 
 
 I. 8. Upon her head [was] a platted hive of straw. 
 
 1. 190. Among the many that mine eyes have seen [was] 
 Not one whose flame my heart so much as warm'd. 
 
 (3) Asyndeton : this is so largely used as to give a distinct colour to 
 the style. The most strilsing instances are : 
 
 U. 44-7. gave the flood . . . cracked . . . found. 
 
 II. 51, 52, 'gan to tear ; cried, O false blood 1 
 
 11. 170-4. And knew . . . heard . . . saw . . . thought. 
 
 Now, these are among the main structural marks of 
 Chapman's style. Ellipsis or asyndeton may be exampled 
 in nearly every page he wrote : 
 
 That statue 'tis [that] still weeps for former thought.' 
 
 Ovid's Banquet, st. 3. 
 
 Why dance ye not, ye daughters of the wood? 
 Wither forever, if [you do] not now rejoice. 
 
 Id. St. 20. 
 
 Ladies must be adored that are but fair ; 
 
 But [to be] apt besides with art to tempt the ear 
 
 In notes of nature, is a goddess' part. 
 
 Id. St. 29. 
 
 ' Eilipsis of this kind is of course common in Shakespeare. 
 
 44 
 
SYNTAX 45 
 
 Then knit she up, lest loose, her glowing hair 
 Should scorch the centre, and incense the air. 
 
 Id. St. 70. 
 
 how accursed are they [who] thy favour scorn, 
 
 Hyrnnus in Cynthiam, 
 
 But then how bless'd were they [whom] thy favour graces. 
 
 Id. 
 
 My glorious temple, great Lucifera, 
 That was the study of all Asia 
 Two hundred twenty summers to erect. 
 Built by Chersiphrone thy architect. 
 
 Id. 
 
 She took out one. 
 Most large, most artful, chiefly fair, and shone 
 Like to a star. 
 
 15th Odyssey, 138. 
 
 I thought, till now 
 Thy wisdom was superior to [that of] all th' inhabitants 
 Of gleby Lyoia; but now impute apparent wants 
 To that discretion thy words shew, to say I lost my ground 
 For Ajax' greatness. 
 
 nth lUad, 142-6. 
 
 This was the point [that] pierced Hero to the heart. 
 
 Hero and Leander, iii. 
 
 Begot when father Judgment is away, 
 And, gossip-like, says because others say. 
 
 Id, ib. 
 
 Whose will was, they should stay and sacrifice 
 Whole hecatombs to PaUas, to forgo 
 Her high wraths to them. 
 
 Zrd Odyssey, 195. 
 
 Close to him ascended 
 The duke Pisistratus, [who] the reins intended 
 And soourg'd, to force to field [the horses], who freely flew. 
 
 Id. 647-9. 
 
 An ox with speed 
 Cause [to be] hither brought. 
 
 To wash at flood the weeds I cannot wear 
 Before ropurified. 
 
 Id. 567. 
 
 6th Odyssey, 85, 
 
46 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Though roofs far richer we far off possess, 
 Yet, from, our native, all our more is less. 
 
 9th Odyttey, 66. 
 
 A sight [that] taught magic his deep mystery 
 Quicker in danger than Diana's eye. 
 
 Ovid's Banquet, st. 42. 
 
 One could give ten instances from this single poem. 
 Ellipsis with Chapman is normal and natural; and it 
 readily passes into sheer false grammar. Take the first 
 four lines of The Shadow of Night : they defy parsing. 
 
 Great goddess, to whose throne in Cynthian fires 
 This earthly altar endless fumes expires ; 
 Therefore, in fumes of sighs and fires of grief 
 To fearful chances thou lend'st bold relief. 
 
 The fifth section is equally inconstruable. Asyndeton is 
 the least of Chapman's syntactical foibles, but he abounds 
 in it. For instance : 
 
 For were not his fictions composed of the sinews and souls of all 
 these, how could they defy fire, iron, and be combined with eternity ? 
 
 Fref. to Beader, with Iliads. 
 
 In which kept bouse 
 A man in shape immane, and monsterous. 
 Fed all his flocks alone, nor would afford 
 Commerce with men. 
 
 9th Odyssey, 267-70. 
 
 Whom God gives over they themselves forsake. 
 Their griefs their joys, their God their devil, make. 
 
 IQth Odyssey, 403-4. 
 
 And even my mean means, means had to maintain 
 A wealthy house, and kept a manly prease, 
 Was counted blessed, and the poor access 
 Of any beggar did not scorn, but feed 
 With often hand, and any man of need 
 Believ'd as fitted; kept my servants too . . ., 
 
 19th Qdyiaey, 102. 
 
SYNTAX 47 
 
 Out rush'd amaz'd Eumseus ; and let go 
 The cup to earth that he had labour'd so, 
 Cleans'd for the neat wine, did the prince surpriBS 
 Kist his fair forehead, both his lovely eyes, 
 Both his white hands, and tender tears distill'd. 
 
 16th Odyssey, 15-19. 
 
 A ffirmin g that th' unalter'd destinies 
 
 Not only have decreed he shall not die 
 
 Apart his friends, but of necessity 
 
 Enjoy their sights before those fatal hours, 
 
 His country earth reach, and erected towers. 
 
 5th Odyssey, 148-52. 
 
 There came a commune beggar to the court, 
 Who in the city begged of all resort, 
 Ezcell'd in madness of the gut, drunk, eat, 
 Fast intermission, was most hugely great, 
 Yet had no fibres in him nor no force. 
 
 18th Odyssey, 1-5. 
 
 See, now ascends the glorious bride of brides. 
 Nuptials and triumphs glittering by her sides : 
 Juno and Hymen do her train adorn, 
 Ten thousand torches round about them borne : 
 Dumb silence, mounted on the Cyprian star, 
 With becks rebukes the winds before his car, 
 Where she advanced; beats down with cloudy mace, 
 The feeble light to black Satumius' palace : 
 Behind her, with a brace of silver hinds, 
 In ivory chariot, swifter than the winds. 
 Great Hypenon's homSd daughter drawn. 
 Enchantress-like deck'd in disparent lawn. 
 Circled with charms and incantations 
 That ride huge spirits, and outrageous passions. 
 Music and mood she loves, but love she hates. 
 As curious ladies do their public cates. 
 
 Hymnus in Noctem, end. 
 
 Ye living spirits then, if any live, 
 
 Whom like extremes do like affections give. 
 
 Shun, shun this cruel light, and end your thrall 
 
 In these soft shades of sable funeral: 
 
 From whence with ghosts whom vengeance holds from rest, 
 
 Dog-fiends and monsters haunting the distressed. 
 
 As men whose parents tyranny hath slain. 
 
 Whose sisters rape and bondage do sustain. 
 
 Id. at. 17 
 
48 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Asyndeton is perhaps too mild a name for some of these 
 constructions ; and it may be left to expert grammarians to 
 say where ellipsis or asyndeton, or another, is the epithet 
 applicable in the following string of anomalies : 
 
 Time's motion, being like the reeling sun's, 
 
 Or as the sea reciprocally runs, 
 
 Hath brought us now to their opinions ; 
 
 Ab in our garments ancient fashions 
 
 Are newly worn ; and as sweet poesy 
 
 WUl not be clad in her supremacy 
 
 With those strange garments (Eome's hexameters) 
 
 As she is English ; but In right prefers 
 
 Our native robes (put on with skilful hands, 
 
 English heroics) to those antic garlands, 
 
 Accounting it no meed, but mockery, 
 
 "When her steep brows already prop the sky, 
 
 To put on start-ups, and yet let it fall. 
 
 There seems to be a breathing-point here: whereafter 
 we go on : 
 
 No otherwise (0 queen celestial) 
 
 Can we believe Ephesia's state will be, 
 
 But spoU with foreign grace, and change with thee 
 
 The piureness of thy-never tainted life. 
 
 Scorning the subject title of a wife ; 
 
 Thy body not composed in thy birth 
 
 Of such condensed matter as the earth. 
 
 Thy shunning faithless men's society, 
 
 Betaking thee to hounds and archery, 
 
 To deserts and inaccessible hills, 
 
 Abhorring pleasure in Earth's common ills, 
 
 Commit most willing rapes on all our hearts. 
 
 Hymnus in CyntMam. 
 
 Perhaps these samples will satisfy Professor Mackail that 
 in any poem of Chapman's he can find instances of every 
 vice or whim of style that he has noted in the Complaint. 
 
 The whole Shadow of Night, with all its difference of 
 mood, is of much the same literary texture; and one 
 passage might alone serve to reveal the author of the poem 
 under scrutiny: 
 
SYNTAX 49 
 
 So slightly touoh'd the panther with her scent 
 
 This irksome covert, and away she went, 
 
 Down to a fruitful island sited by. 
 
 Full of all wealth, delight, and empery. 
 
 Ever with child of curious architect. 
 
 Yet still deliver'd ; pav'd with dames select, 
 
 On whom rich feet in foulest boots might tread, 
 
 And never foul them ; for kind Cupid spread 
 
 Such perfect colours on their pleasing faces, 
 
 That their reflects clad foulest weeds with graces. 
 
 Beauty strikes fajicy blind ; pied show deceives us. 
 
 Sweet banquets tempt our healths, when temper leaves us. 
 
 Sucli is his manner in his first published poem ; and in his 
 non-dramatic verse Chapman wrote very like that to the 
 end ; his translation of the Odyssey exhibiting on every 
 page some of the peculiarities of the style of the CoMPiiAiUT. 
 
 Some of these extracts, however, suggest one considera- 
 tion that may be urged against the hypothesis of Chapman's 
 authorship of the Complaint — the fact, namely, that it 
 contains no instance of his common practice of rhyming by 
 false syllabic stress, as with mace and palace, hands and 
 gaxlands. Usually the syllables are wrong, so that we are 
 invited to read a rhyme by making a line lame. This 
 annoying usage, common in his youth, and apparently 
 deriving from a period in which such French stresses were 
 not false,^ pervades Chapman's earlier rhymed work, down 
 to and including Hebo and Lbandee. He and Peele are 
 the worst offenders ; but Spenser, who perhaps led the way 
 for his period, is also guilty; and it was something of a 
 distinction on Shakespeare's part to eschew the abuse 
 altogether. Now, the fact that it is eschewed in the 
 Complaint, but present in Heed and Leandbr, raises the 
 question whether the former, taken as Chapman's work, is 
 not the later poem of the two. 
 
 It seems possible now to sketch a chronology. Archaistic 
 false rhymes are frequent in The Shadow op Night, pub- 
 
 ■ Surrey, for instance, scans alternately pdlace and paUce, S,ltar and 
 altar. 
 
50 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 lished in 1594. They are rather less frequent in Ovid's 
 Banquet, issued in 1695 ; but are still abundant in 
 Chapman's part of Hebo and Lbandeb. If we assume 
 the partial reform to be a result of the example set in 
 Shakespeare's Venus (1593), and regard Ovid's Banquet 
 as a rival poem to that, we might similarly expect the 
 Complaint, written in the Luceeob stanza, again with a 
 certain air of competition, to show still further the influ- 
 ence of the reforming example. Now, Chapman's part of 
 Hero and Lbandeb, though not published till 1598, 
 appears to have been written years earlier, since in the lines : 
 
 Tell it [Marlowe's spirit] how much his late desires I tender, 
 (If yet it know not), and to light surrender 
 My soul's dark offspring, 
 
 he avows having recently published or arranged to pubUsh 
 his Shadow op Night to fulfil his dead friend's wish. 
 Further, Marlowe's unfinished poem was entered for publi- 
 cation in September 1593; and Chapman was likely to 
 begin his continuation soon afterwards. We seem led 
 to infer, then, that the Hebo and Leandee continuation 
 was written in 1594 ; ^ and that the Complaint, written 
 later, in direct rivalry with Luceece, makes the final 
 capitulation to rhyme-reform as a result of Shakespeare's 
 example, and, belike, of some discussion on the subject, in 
 which the common patron probably took part. In the 
 later poems the blemish hardly ever reappears. The 
 Chapman hypothesis, then, is not necessarily shaken by 
 the absence of archaistic rhymes from the Complaint : it 
 may even be thereby strengthened. 
 
 But we have still to establish our hypothesis by meeting, 
 80 far as may be, the critical challenge set up by Professor 
 Mackail's list of words and meanings special to the Com- 
 plaint in the Shakespeare Concordance. It is only over 
 these that we can claim a " decision." 
 
 ' This was the view of Fleay, who puts it " circa 1594-5." 
 
§ 5. THE VOCABULARY 
 
 FiEST we have a list of twenty-three words not found in 
 the Shakespeare concordance outside of the Complaint : 
 
 Plaintful (1. 2) 
 Untuok'd (31) 
 Sheav'd (31) 
 Maund (36) 
 Affectedly (48) 
 Enswath'd (49) 
 Flurive (50) 
 Fastly (61) 
 
 Browny (85) 
 Termless (94) 
 Habitude (114) 
 Weepingly (207) 
 Annexions (208) 
 Invis'd (212) 
 Pensiv'd (219) 
 Enpatron (224) 
 
 Phraseless (225) 
 Congest (258) 
 Supplicant (276) 
 Extincture (294) 
 Plenitude (302) 
 TJnexperient (318) 
 Lover'd (230) 
 
 To these should be added : 
 
 Blusterer (58), Sawn (91), Appertainings (115), Ender (222), Aloes (273). 
 
 Professor Mackail adds another list of seven that are 
 substantially non- Shakespearean : 
 
 Sistermg (1. 2) : sister as a verb occurs in one of the prologues in 
 Febicles, which are generally held to be whoUy non-Shake- 
 spearean. 
 
 Forbod (1. 164) = forbidden. 
 
 Acture (1. 185) : but enaoture occurs in Hamlet. 
 
 Paled (1. 198), meaning not, as in Shakespeare, fenced, but pale : it may 
 be merely a variant spelling ot pallid. 
 
 Encrimson'd (1. 201) : but crimsoned occurs in JuLins Caesar. 
 
 Impleach'd (1. 205) : but pleach' d occurs in Much Ado. 
 
 Blend (1. 215) parti-ooloured : blended in an analogous sense occurs in 
 Tboilds akd Crbssida, IV. V. : " this blended knight, half Trojan 
 and half Greek." 
 
 To this list should be added sleided (48), which occurs only 
 in Pericles, Gower Prologue to Act IV. 21. 
 
52 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Yet a third list, of sixteen words used in a different sense 
 from their Shakespearean use, is evidentially perhaps — so 
 far as it will stand — the most important of all: 
 
 Ficlele (1. 5), meaning delicate or " nesh." 
 
 Storming (1. 7), with the sense of raising-a-storm-over : "storming her 
 
 world." 
 Occagion (I. 86), in the sense of impact. 
 Parcels (1. 87), meaning locks of hair. 
 Pheenix (L 93), used as an adjective, and apparently meaning newlj- 
 
 spronting. 
 Cost (1. 96), apparently in the sense of coat {caste, cdte). It is curioas 
 
 that there is the converse doubt in 1. 235, where coat seems to mean 
 
 cost, though it may perhaps have its ordinary meaning. 
 Charmed (L 146), in the sense of exercising charm. 
 Mood (L 201), in the sense of tint or colour. 
 Talents (1. 204), meaning locks of (ruddy or golden) hair, like parcels, 
 
 already cited. 
 BaMance (1. 214), used ^in a highly technical sense = power of vision, in 
 
 accordance with one particular theory as to the nature of the sense 
 
 of sight. 
 Similes (1. 227), apparently meaning, or substituted through confusion 
 
 for, symbols : a most curious usage. Simile in the ordinary sense 
 
 is fairly common in Shakespeare. 
 Distract (1. 231), as an adjective = separate. 
 Suit (1. 234), used collectively and = body of suitors. 
 Caged (1. 249), in the sense of cage-like or encaging. 
 Impress (1. 267), in the sense of strike against or attack. 
 Suffering (1. 272), with the meaning of painful. 
 
 Tn his first list Professor Mackail points to "the large 
 number of Latinisms : fluxive, habitude, annexion, congest 
 (=heap together), supplicant, extincture, plenitude, unex- 
 perient ; and the fondness for coining adverbs : affectedly, 
 fastly, weepingly ; and participles : sheav'd, pensiv'd, 
 lover'd." 
 
 In the second and third lists he again stresses the author's 
 fondness " for Latinisms {occasion, distract, impress) ; and 
 for participial neologisms {storming and suffering, analo- 
 gously to sistering) ; and charm' d a,ni cag'd, analogously 
 to sheav'd, pensiv'd, lover'd." 
 
 All these, we shall see, are in the manner of Chapman ; 
 
THE VOCABULARY 53 
 
 but at this point I would suggest some qualifications in 
 regard to the third list. I doubt, to begin with, whether 
 the word JicJcle, in line 5, has been correctly printed. 
 Neither in Chapman nor anywhere else have I seen the 
 word used with the force of " delicate, or ' nesh '." There 
 is no such word in the New English Dictionary. It seems 
 reasonable to suppose that the author wrote " sickly," or 
 possibly brickie, or brittle.^ It is doubtful, again, whether 
 occasion, in line 86, really means " impact " : it is probably 
 only a stretching of the ordinary miscellaneous use of the 
 word, which Chapman employs constantly. Cost in line 96 
 may mean " coat," but coat in Une 236, I suspect, really 
 does mean just clothing, and is a mark of Chapman, who 
 uses it many times. Mood in Une 201 hardly signifies 
 colour : it is just a Chapmanesque coercion of a word, with 
 the suggestion " in the blushing mood " ; and parcels in 
 line 87 means simply bunches or portions ; not " locks-of- 
 hair ' ' specifically, but parcels of hair (see line 231) . ' ' Silken ' ' 
 is a favourite adjective of Chapman's. The confusion of 
 simile (a word he often uses, as does Shakespeare) with 
 " symbol " is quite in his way of diction. His uses of 
 " ingenious " and " ingenuous," for instance, cannot be 
 discriminated. Suit, finally (1. 234), may just mean " dress," 
 though it is hard to understand the next line : 
 
 Whose rarest havings made the blossoms dote. 
 
 It seems to suggest rich embroidery. AU the other words 
 
 in the list, we shall see, are either actually used by 
 
 Chapman or quite in his manner. 
 
 Yet a fourth list has similar evidential importance, 
 
 consisting as it does of twelve words only once or rarely 
 
 used by Shakespeare in his plays, and not found in his 
 
 genuine poems : 
 
 Beword (1. 1), also in Hamlet. 
 Concave (1. 1), also in Julius Cjesae. 
 
 ' Chapman calls woman " a most brittle creature." All FooU, I. i. 
 
54 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Pelleted (1. 18), also in Antony and Cleopatka. 
 
 Orbed (earth) (1. 25), also in Hamlet (orbed ground). 
 
 Commix (1. 28), also in Cvmbblinb. 
 
 Pieced (= enhanced) (1. 119), also in Antony and Clbopatea, Coriolanus, 
 
 Wintbk's Tale. 
 Dialogue (as verb) (1. 132), also in Timon of Athens. 
 Brokers (1. 173), also in Hamlet. 
 
 Amplify (1. 209), also in Coriolanus, King Lbar, Cymbbline. 
 Cautel (1. 303), also in Hamlet. 
 
 To which I would add : 
 
 Beal (1. 114), also in All's Well and Coriolanus. 
 
 Finally it is noted that two of the words in the first list, 
 annexions and exti7icture, may be compared with annexment 
 in Hamlet and extincted in Othello : and that two more, 
 termless and phraseless, may be compared with shunless 
 and aidless, which occur in one line in Cobiolanus. 
 
 On this head we may say at once that while word-making 
 of the kind under notice was a common activity with many 
 Elizabethans, no one was more devoted to it than Chapman. 
 He is the supreme neologist among the poets, as is Nashe 
 among the writers of prose. An incomplete collection of 
 his specialties ' in adjectives, adverbs, participles, and nouns 
 will make the fact clear at once : 
 
 Adjectives in y : orby, leavy, cliffy, cavy, gulfy, foody, 
 torchy, planky, sulphury, wolfy, spurry, mitigatory, impera- 
 tory, yoky, oxy, fevery, flamy, nervy, herby, gleby, yieldy, 
 barky, owly, fistulary, rooty, artly. 
 
 Adjectives in less : Partless (= impartial), gloriless, fame- 
 less, blushless, reasonless, expectless, taintless, accessless, 
 sweetless, speedless, seemless (= unseemly), wayless, worth- 
 less (= unworthy), respectless, gutless, f ellowless, returnless. 
 
 Adjectives in ful : adviceful, assistful, amendsful, conceit- 
 ful, directful, contentful, contemptful, charmful, estrangeful, 
 exciteful, expenseful, eyeful, lengthful, nestful, noiseful, 
 
 • Not all these are of his invention, but many seem to be ; and only a 
 few are found in the other dramatist?, 
 
THE VOCABULARY 55 
 
 faultful, praiseful, placeful, proofful, showful, sightful, 
 spiritful, spoilful, soundful, relentful, topful, grapeful. 
 
 Adverbs: foreignly, feastfully, foldedly, displeasedly, 
 futurely, aversively, guardfully, headlongy, headlongly, 
 spoilfuUy, showfully, sudden'stly, wishly (= wishfully), 
 wishedly, prostrately, prostitutely. 
 
 Participles : author'd, contected, dissavaged, fellow'd, 
 furnaced, insea'd, heir'd, unheir'd, odour'd, ill-lung'd, foully- 
 languaged, father'd, uncle'd, person'd, scandal'd, substanced, 
 unsilenc'd, vapour'd, brass-foundation'd, damaskt, Christ- 
 mas'd, arras'd, taper'd. 
 
 Nouns ending in ure : appeasure, attainture, contem- 
 perature, corporature, disposure, expansure, expressure, 
 circumvecture, expulsure, facture, flexure, fluxure, extensure, 
 exhausture, opposure, supposure, sumpture. 
 
 Nouns ending in ion : addiction, addression, aversation, 
 discession, descension, dismission, egression, eversion, ex- 
 punction, deduction (= bringing away), inclamation, 
 insultation, redition, reminiscion, repunction, ingression, 
 susception, suspection, transcension. 
 
 Nouns feminine ending in ess : Ambassadress, contendress, 
 guidress, inhabitress, waggoness, butleress, tutress,creditress, 
 philosophress, administress, ministress, doctress, inter- 
 nunciess. 
 
 Nouns ending in er : apprehender, assumer, abider, 
 blesser, circler, comprehender, assailer, decreer, doter, 
 enjoyer, enterer, expugner, frighter, imposer, law-menders 
 and suppliers, saver, studier, utterer, understander, villain- 
 izer, concluder, fleckers, hurter, marcher, goers (= legs), 
 walkers (= legs), encouragers. 
 
 Of these words a large number are used by Chapman 
 only once, and few of them often. He is remarkable 
 equally for his mannerism in respect of words which he 
 overworks ad nauseam and for his frequent framing or 
 reviving of new or old terms "for the nonce" only. 
 
§ 6. SPECIAL CLUES TO CHAPMAN 
 
 Many of Chapman's coinages or revivals, it will be seen, 
 are in the ordinary way of word-making and archaism, and 
 a number which have not entered into the common stock 
 might usefully have done so. In any case, it is clear that 
 he was equal to the invention of all the odd words in the 
 Complaint. Before, however, coming to the notation of 
 those of them which he did apparently coin, I would 
 specify yet a further set of words, used at times by Shake- 
 speare, but more frequently by Chapman. In different 
 degrees, they all strengthen the claim for his authorship. 
 A preliminary caution and explanation may be offered 
 to students who have not worked at vocabulary tests, and 
 who may have been confused by the lore of the Baconists. 
 Some of the latter, and their congeners, finding their own 
 claims confuted by proof that words and phrases which they 
 supposed to be special to Bacon and Shakespeare were in 
 universal Elizabethan use, fallaciously protest that any 
 attempt to trace by vocabulary the authorship of anonymous 
 or disputed plays is on all fours with their procedure. 
 Properly conducted, it really differs from their devices as 
 does astronomy from astrology. Baconics takes for granted 
 exactly what we are concerned to dispute — the absolute 
 authorship by Shakespeare of all plays and poems ascribed 
 to him by his editors. The critical method is one of 
 discrimination : Baconics begins and ends in indiscrimina- 
 tion. Where criticism is concerned to find by internal 
 evidence what is genuine and what spurious, the Baconist 
 takes the entire Foho as necessarily from one hand, and 
 
 55 
 
SPECIAL CLUES TO CHAPMAN 57 
 
 undertakes to show that all that is in the Folio and the 
 poems is Baconic. If it be asked whether " Shakespeare " 
 wrote the " Apocrypha," Baconism has no rational answer 
 to offer, since the Baconic method will equally avail to 
 assign to Bacon anything and everything belonging to 
 Bacon's age. 
 
 The rational critic who undertakes to prove that X wrote 
 all or part of the work a, commonly ascribed to Y, must go 
 about to show that certain marks which are more or less 
 peculiar to the work of X, and absent or uncommon in the 
 accepted work of Y, are frequent in the piece discussed. 
 And even this is only one of the necessary tests : a satisfying 
 proof must include others, and set forth a concurrence of 
 marks — as style, verse, idea, image. Merely to say that a 
 has marks found in X, and must therefore be his, would be 
 like including in the genus homo all animals which have 
 hair, skin, teeth, or eyes, because Man has these marks. 
 And this is substantially the method of the Baconist, who has 
 no check-test to apply. Those of versification are denied to 
 him, and those of general style he ignores. But even the 
 vocabulary test he applies without knowledge or logic. 
 His way is to take any phrase, any thought or image, 
 any word metaphorically used, that is to be found in Bacon 
 and Shakespeare, and claim that the common use points to 
 a common author. The obvious duty of ascertaining whether 
 other authors commonly use the same word in the same 
 way he hardly ever contemplates. A boundless ignorance 
 of Elizabethan literature has thus given currency to the 
 claim that such metaphor-words as ape, bowels, cloud, 
 dregs, scour, swelling, mountain, ocean, sea, painted, top, 
 sinews, sovereign, spice, wilderness, shadow, weed, and so 
 on, being similarly used by both writers, go to prove that 
 Bacon wrote the Plays. But these words were freely used 
 in the same way by everybody in the period ; and the claim 
 is pure folly. By such a test Bacon could be proved to have 
 written any of the books issued in his adult life; and, 
 
58 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 per contra, any contemporary could be proved to have 
 written any of his. Equally Jonson or Chapman could 
 be proved to have written all Shakespeare, and Shakespeare 
 all Jonson and Chapman. The Baconist method is outside 
 of logic. 
 
 Otherwise absurd is the plan of citing all manner of 
 words in the Plays which seem to the Baconist to be 
 " classical " coinages, by way of proving the play- writer's 
 scholarship, without making the slightest investigation as 
 to their previous currency. When a Hallam could suppose 
 that the physical meaning of " translate," a word used with 
 that force in the current versions of the Bible, was an 
 uncommon Latinism for Shakespeare's day, it may be 
 guessed how the ordinary Baconist riots in that direction. 
 
 A semblance of rational method is set up when apparently 
 peculiar phrases or thoughts are noted in both writers. 
 Specific ideas and habitual phrases are among the clues 
 by which an author may be traced in anonymous or 
 composite or falsely assigned contemporary work. But a 
 first requisite for even such tentative tracing is some little 
 knowledge of the literature of the period. When the 
 Baconist holds up his hands over a duplication of the 
 phrase " a green wound," or "play his prize," or "sparks 
 hid under ashes," or "starting-holes," or "love creeps 
 where it cannot go," he merely proves his ignorance of the 
 mass of Tudor literature. As a matter of fact the Baconist 
 is daily faced by the deadly dilemma of dropping his mono- 
 mania or plunging (as a number do) into the infinite mania 
 of assigning to Bacon the bulk of Elizabethan literature, 
 with Montaigne added. 
 
 The difference between the rational and the irrational use 
 of verbal clues is simply the difference between a carefully 
 checked and an utterly unchecked induction. Every such 
 clue must be checked by other tests; and every theory of 
 the presence of a given author must be checked by an 
 inquiry as to whether other authors are not equally eligible 
 
SPECIAL CLUES TO CHAPMAN 59 
 
 as claimants. Broadly speaking, the clue from vocabulary 
 is simply "first aid" in a quandary; and first aid is 
 admittedly precarious. Fleay, for instance, was apt to 
 assign to Lodge any anonymous contemporary play in 
 which he found the phrase " cooling card " ; and he was 
 doubly sure when he found in the same play " razor of 
 Palermo." But the first clue is certainly hazardous, for the 
 phrase is used by other dramatists. When we have noted 
 that Peele is much given to the tag of " sandy plains," it is 
 reasonable to surmise his hand in an anonjmaous play of his 
 period in which that tag occurs ostensibly at random, 
 provided that we can say that so far as we know no other 
 dramatist so uses it. But even when that can be said of the 
 tic-phrase, we have to consider further whether the play 
 under consideration is otherwise in Peele's style. An 
 anonymous writer might have caught up his tag. Lodge, 
 for instance, repeats the phrase " divine instinct " in his 
 Wounds op Civil War; and one is thereby encouraged 
 to assent to Fleay's ascription to him of a share in the 
 Troublesome Eaigne op King John, where the phrase 
 also occurs. But Chapman too adopts it, and the problem 
 demands further elucidation. 
 
 And there remains the contingency of deliberate imitation. 
 At the Academy, everybody can distinguish between the 
 work of Mr. Brangwyn and that of Mr. Blank ; but when 
 an intelligent admirer of Mr. Brangwyn works with his 
 mind on Mr. Brangwyn's colour effects he may set some of 
 us looking at our catalogues ; and where there is no cata- 
 logue, and no signature, such imitations have in the past 
 given the critics much trouble. It has taken a whole 
 critical school, latterly, to secure correct assignments in 
 the case of a number of Old Masters — and Apprentices.' 
 
 ' In the case before us, it has occurred to Professor Mackail that 
 there might have been a deliberate resort to parody. But, as he justly 
 decides, there is no semblance of parody in the poem, which is elaborately 
 serious, 
 
60 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Between the anonymous plays and the disputed plays 
 ascribed to Shakespeare and others, the Elizabethan drama 
 is still a happy hunting ground for any one who will 
 undertake to apply equivalent scientific methods there. 
 Ultimately, the right tests are settled by common sense, 
 vigilantly applied. As Eleay argued, the logic of such 
 investigations is substantially the logic of the physical 
 sciences. Word-clues and clues of phrase, tag, idea, theme, 
 manner, mannerism, and total technique, are all licit so far 
 as they go; only they must be checked and corroborated. 
 Generally speaking, we are entitled to suppose that plays 
 were written by playwrights, and poems by poets, not by 
 Lord Chancellors or bishops; if we argue otherwise we 
 need some extra evidence. But even a plausible and 
 partly justified hypothesis may turn out to be wrong ; and 
 there is nothing for it but to justify our hypothesis as 
 fully and carefully as we can, and leave it to run the 
 gauntlet of logical analysis, counter-evidence, and counter 
 theory. 
 
 In the case now in hand, having already offered grounds 
 in chronology, biography, style, substance, and syntax for 
 the Chapman hypothesis, I propose to seek corroboration 
 through verbal clues of three kinds : 
 
 1. Words in the Complaint that are used there and by 
 Chapman in his signed work with a different force (or 
 scansion) from that in which they are used by Shakespeare. 
 
 2. Words in the Complaint that are used very similarly 
 and very frequently by Chapman — what we may term 
 tic-words, though possibly used also by Shakespeare. 
 
 3. Words occurring only in the Complaint according 
 to the Shakespeare concordance. 
 
 It will be obvious to any reasonable mind that such clues 
 are profoundly different in value from the methods above 
 discussed. And to the grounds for inference so supplied I 
 shall add a number drawn from analogies of more or less 
 uncommon phrase between the Complaint and Chapman's 
 
SPECIAL CLUES TO CHAPMAN 61 
 
 signed work — analogies not decisive in themselves, but 
 important as corroborations. 
 
 And first as to words used in an apparently Chapmanesque 
 way : 
 
 1. Authorized. — This occurs only twice in the Shakespeare 
 concordance apart from the Complaint : 
 
 (1) A woman's story at a winter fire, 
 Authorized by her grandam. 
 
 Macbeth, III. iv. 66. 
 
 Here both the meaning and the accentuation are ostensibly 
 different from those of the word in the Complaint : 
 
 His rudeness so with his auth6rized youth 
 Did livery falseness in a pride of truth. 
 
 The double difference is highly significant, and when we 
 find in Sonnet 35 the line : 
 
 (2) Authorizing thy trespass with compare, 
 
 we are divided between the doubt before suggested as to the 
 authenticity of that Sonnet and the question whether, 
 supposing it to be genuine, Shakespeare was there using 
 a scansion which he had heard from Chapman. The 
 meaning here is not that conveyed in Macbeth. I cannot 
 ■with any confidence press the possibility that Sonnet 35 
 might be Chapman's, though the jolting line : 
 
 Excusing their sins more than their sins are, 
 
 is of a kind that he often produces ; and that other : 
 
 For to thy sensual fault I bring in sense,' 
 
 conveys (obscurely enough) a kind of thought and phrase 
 common with him. Shakespeare of course might echo both 
 words and thoughts of Chapman's, as he echoes Drayton, 
 Sidney, Daniel, and Greene elsewhere in the Sonnets. 
 
 ' Some of the early reprinters read " incense " ; and this is worth 
 considering, though apparently fantastic. 
 
62 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 But whatever view we may take of Sonnet 35, it must be 
 allowed that both meaning and scansion in the Complaint 
 point to Chapman. Compare : 
 
 Men must auth6rize it [Scripture] ; antiquities 
 Must be explored, to spirit and give it thighs. 
 
 Hymn to Christ upon the Crois, 67. 
 
 And where with dove-like sweet humility 
 They all things should authorize or deny. 
 
 Andromeda Liberata, 60. 
 
 May well authorize all your acts of note. 
 
 Id. 75. 
 
 The forms 
 Of judgment in authorized men, that in their courts maintain, 
 With violent office, wrested laws. 
 
 Trans, of lUad, xvi. 367. 
 
 Grac'd 
 With aJl choice of authorized power. 
 
 13th Od/ystey, 14. 
 
 As illustrating the variability of Elizabethan scansions, we 
 may note that Chapman has the lines : 
 
 But all this shall not make me break the c6mmerce 
 Authoriz'd by our treaties. 
 
 Bryan's Tragedy, V. i. 66. 
 
 where he seems to depart not only ^frorn his usual pro- 
 nunciation of the word before us, but to read cdmmerce, 
 where he usually has commerce. It is just possible, however, 
 that he meant here to make his usual stresses. 
 
 2. Dialect. — The only other uses of this word in the 
 Shakespeare concordance are: 
 
 To go out of my dialect, which yon discommend so much. 
 
 Lear, II. ii. 115. 
 
 In her youth 
 There is a prone and speechless dialect 
 Such as move men. 
 
 Measure for Measure, I. ii. 188. 
 
SPECIAL CLUES TO CHAPMAN 63 
 
 In the first case, the meaning is literal : Kent has been 
 talking hyperbolically ; and Cornwall asks : " What mean'st 
 by this?" In the second, the word is metaphorical. In 
 the Complaint (125) it means either dialectic = persuasive 
 skill, or command of special phrase : 
 
 He had the dialect and different skill, 
 Catching all passions in his craft of will. 
 
 Both senses occur in Chapman : 
 
 Alas, why lent not heaven the soul a tongue? 
 
 Nor language, nor peculiar Malect 
 To make her high conceits so highly sung? 
 
 Ovid's Banquet, st. 112. 
 
 Their word-for-word traductions where they lose 
 The free grace of their natural dialect. 
 
 Fref. to Beader, with complete lUad. 
 
 Of translation and the natural difference of dialects necessarily 
 to be observed in it. 
 
 Id. note. 
 
 Perhaps the first use approximates to that in the line from 
 Mbasubb for Measure ; but at least it coincides substan- 
 tially with that in the Complaint. Again, we have " the 
 Latin dialect " in Sir Giles Goosbcap ; and " to save 
 the liberty and dialect of mine own language " in the 
 preface to the Justification of a Strange Action of 
 Nero. 
 
 3. Deified. — This word occurs only in the Complaint 
 among the poems; and the verb occurs only once in all 
 the plays: 
 
 All, forsooth, deifying the name of Bosalind. 
 
 As You Like It, III. ii. 381. 
 
 This use is metaphorical, while that in the Complaint is 
 relatively literal or primary: 
 
 And when in his fair parts she [LoveJ did abide, 
 She was new lodged and newly deified. 
 
64 
 
 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Love, already a goddess (for the poet here makes Love 
 female), is deified anew. Now, this corresponds closely 
 with Chapman's practice : 
 
 And thus blest Hymen joy'd his gracious bride, 
 And for his joy was after deified. 
 
 Hero and Leander, V. (Tale of Terat). 
 
 These acts, in some part left, 
 Tell us, as others, deified seed of Jove. 
 
 Whoever thou art of the Deified. 
 
 And he that was in person deified, 
 Eurymachus. 
 
 Up to Olympus, the firm continent, 
 
 That bears in endless being the deified kind. 
 
 Are you of mortal, or the deified, race ? 
 
 Which no power beside 
 Can boast, of men, or of the deified. 
 
 Jove, and all ye deified. 
 
 He replied: "I hold 
 No deified state." 
 
 Atrides, guarded with heaven's deified host. 
 
 The deified supremes. 
 
 1st Odyssey, 18. 
 Ath Odyssey, 509, 
 
 Id. 839. 
 
 6lh Odyssey, 63, 
 Id. 221. 
 
 9th Odyssey, 705, 
 12th Odyssey, 531. 
 
 letli Odyssey, 241, 
 
 5th Odyssey, 84, 
 
 18th Odyssey, 280. 
 
 Exonerate 
 Our sinking vessel of his deified load [i.e. Bacchus], 
 
 Trans, of Horn. Hymn to Bacchus. 
 
 The deified King [Apollo] 
 Of that unshorn and everlasting spring. 
 
 Horn. Hymn to Apollo. 
 
SPECIAL CLUES TO CHAPMAN 65 
 
 And these gifts only let thy deified mind 
 Be circularly pleased with. 
 
 Id. 
 
 The deified Graces. 
 
 Trans, of Georgica of JSesiod, i. 
 
 He hanga in the clouds deified ^th Hymen's shape. 
 
 The Widow's Tears, III. ii. 
 
 Whose [Aphrodite's] virtue Helen felt and knew, by her so 
 
 radiant eyes, 
 White neck, and most enticing breasts, the deified disguise. 
 
 3rd Iliad, 415-16. 
 
 For this does she look to be deified, to have hymns made of her. 
 
 The Widow's Tears, IV. i. 
 
 It is nearly always with this primary and literal force that 
 Chapman uses the word ; and he uses it very often. 
 
 4. Precedent.— This word is used in the Complaint (155) 
 in the sense of warning-example : 
 
 But ah ! who ever shunn'd by precedent 
 The destin'd ills she must herself assay ? 
 
 In Venus and Adonis (26) we have a different use : 
 
 His sweating palm 
 The precedent of pith and livelihood ; 
 
 and in Lucbece (1261) yet another : 
 
 The precedent whereof in Lucrece view: 
 
 where the meaning is simply " instance," or " type." In the 
 plays the word occurs frequently, most often in its accepted 
 sense, sometimes as an adjective, precedent ( = preceding). 
 In King John (V. ii. 3) " precedent " means the draft of a 
 document. In Chapman the word always seems to signify 
 either example (model) or warning : 
 
 King's precedents in license lack no danger. 
 
 Bevenge of Busty, IV. i. 
 
 5 
 
66 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Hie deeds inimitable, like the sea 
 
 That shuts still as it opes, and leaves no tracts 
 
 Nor prints of precedent for poor men's facts." 
 
 BuBsy D'Amboii, I. i. 
 
 All Homer's books are such as have been precedents ever 
 since of all sorts of poems. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to the Earl Marshal, 
 
 Pref. to Achilles' Shield, 
 
 Sacred precedents to every one. 
 
 Shadow of Night, i. 
 
 Princely precedents 
 Which here, in all kinds, my true zeal presents. 
 
 Ep. Ded. to Prince Henry, with 
 
 first Twelve Books of the Iliad. 
 
 Mad'st a commanding precedent of these. 
 
 Hymn to Christ upon the Crosst 
 
 Derive their springs 
 From their base precedents, copied out of kings. 
 
 Byron's Tragedy, V. i. 
 
 Let my slaves' use [i.e. torture], sir, be your precedent. 
 
 CcBsar and Pompey, end. 
 
 Give [my arm] strength that by my precedent 
 I may excite my men to blows. 
 
 16th Iliad, 489. 
 
 A worthy precedent for all the world. 
 
 Sir Giles Goosecap, V. ii. 313. 
 
 By moving precedent to all his kind. 
 
 Id., III. ii. 112. 
 
 Who shall serve as a glass for him to see 
 His faults, and mend them to his precedent. 
 
 All Fools, I. i. 336. 
 
 5. Hail. — The use of this word in the Complaint appears 
 to be non-Shakespearean. It occurs nowhere else in the 
 poems ; and the verb only occurs twice in the plays, in the 
 
 In Tudor times this word had the normal force of acts. 
 
SPECIAL CLUES TO CHAPMAN 67 
 
 sense of " showering down." Professor Mackail notes 
 something pecuHar in the expression in the Complaint 
 (310) : 
 
 That not a heart which in his level came 
 Could 'scape the haU of his all-hurting aim. 
 
 Again the cue seems to be to Chapman : 
 
 In noise of that sweet hail [of comfits] her cries were drown'd. 
 
 Hero and Leander, V. 404. 
 
 And in his [Jove's] bitterest hails his murmurs broke. 
 
 Trans, of Juvenal's Fifth Satire. 
 
 In sharpest hails. 
 
 Tears of Peace. 
 
 6. Spongy. — Nowhere else in the poems does this word 
 occur. In the Complaint the line (326) runs: 
 
 that sad breath his spongy lungs bestowed 
 
 — a tolerably un-Shakespearean utterance. In the plays 
 we have "spongy April," "spongy south," "spongy 
 officers," " spongy to suck in . . .," none of which ex- 
 pressions suggests the capacity to put the line before us in 
 the mouth of a betrayed maiden. Chapman, however, may 
 be pronounced capable of it, and he uses spo7igy several 
 times in his early poems : 
 
 Virtues obscur'd and banished the day, 
 With all the glories of this spongy sway, 
 Prison'd in flesh. 
 
 Hymnus in Noctem, § 14. 
 
 Earth, at this spring, spongy and languorsome. 
 
 Amorous Zodiac, st. 7. 
 
 and also later : 
 
 Not touching at this base and spongy mould. 
 
 Hyrmt to Christ upon the Cross 
 
68 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Again he describes the human body as 
 
 This breathing sepulchre, this sponge of grief, 
 
 Tears of Peace ; 
 
 and his use of the epithet " ill-Iung'd " occurs in a line — 
 
 Ill-lung'd, ill-liver'd, ill-complexion'd Spite. 
 
 Trans, of Georgics of Hesiod, 1 — 
 
 which chimes noticeably with that cited from the Com- 
 plaint. The occurrence of "ill-lung'd" in SiE Giles 
 GoosECAP (I. iv. 43) is one of the many items of phrase and 
 idea by which Professor Parrott substantiates Chapman's 
 authorship of that play.^ 
 7. Carriage. — In lines 22-23 : 
 
 Sometimes her levell'd eyes their carriage ride 
 As they did battery to the spheres intend, 
 
 the use of "carriage" is only a straining of the ordinary 
 Elizabethan meaning of " bearing," found in Shakespeare. 
 But the "ride" suggests a bad pun, and the noun happens 
 to be a favourite of Chapman's, at times ill employed : 
 
 As being a carriage special hard to bear 
 Ocourrente, these ooourrents being so dear. 
 
 Hero and Leander, iv. (Tale of Teras). 
 
 He show'd a stmlike power 
 In carriage of his goodly parts. 
 
 6th Iliad, 552. 
 
 ' Among other tic-words of Chapman found in it are "exempt" 
 (twice), "outward" (twice), "radiant" (thrice), " christal " (twice), 
 "precedent" (twice), "judicial" (twice), "pomps," " titillation," 
 " unohastity," and " commixed." " Dance attendance " in this play 
 (II. i. 62) is an echo of " dance profane attendance " in his lines To 
 M. B.a/rrioti—'Mih phrases antedating that in Henry VIII. The Latin 
 aentenoe quoted by Momford in II. i. 170, is the motto of AndroTtieda 
 Liberata, repeated in the opening lines of its Epistle Dedicatory, and 
 anticipatad in Ovid's Banquet and Hero and Leander, and elsewhere. 
 But indeed the blank-verse is so absolutely Chapman's that it is 
 needlesB to labour the case. 
 
SPECIAL CLUBS TO CHAPMAN 69 
 
 Hia carnage still is cheerful and secure. 
 
 Virgil's Epigram of a Good Man. 
 
 Do not fright 
 Your hearkening kingdoms to your carriage now. 
 
 Epioedmm. 
 
 Prepare your courtliest carriage for the Duke. 
 
 Gentleman Usher, I. i. 
 
 Put on eagle eyes 
 To pry into her carriage. 
 
 All Fools, II. i. 
 
 Yet her even carriage is as far from coyness 
 As from immodesty. 
 
 Monsieur D'Olive, I. i. 
 
 I knew my carriage to be such as no stain can obscure. 
 
 Id., V. i. 
 
 The something-stooping carriage of my neck. 
 
 Byron's Conspiracy, III. ii. 146. 
 
 0, the strange carriage of their acts, by which 
 Men order theirs. 
 
 Ccesar and Povipey, IV. iii. 40. 
 
 With a good carriage. 
 
 Bussy D'Amhois, I. i. 93. 
 
 8. This is the place to notice, further, one or two more 
 instances of Chapman phrases and ideas found in the 
 Complaint. Concerning Professor Mackail's comment on 
 the hne about errors of the blood which are not of the mind 
 I observed that it points to Chapman. "We have the idea 
 here: 
 
 The heavenly dame [Clytemnestra] 
 A good mind had, but was in blood to blame. 
 
 Zrd Odyssey, 365, 
 
 — where Homer (266) simply tells that Clytemnestra had a 
 good mind or understanding, saying nothing of blood. The 
 notion is Chapman's own, or rather a current formula, 
 
70 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 adopted by him.' It occurs in Bussy D'Ambois four times 
 in one scene (V. iv. 79, 178, 189) : 
 
 And must my mind 
 Follow my blood'} 
 
 My sowl more scruple breeds than my blood, sin.' 
 
 Nor never honour'd been, in blood, or mind. 
 
 Cease, my blood 
 To wrestle with my honour, fame, and judgment ; 
 
 and in Bxeon's Tbagedt (I. i. 81) : 
 
 And plain he told them that although his blood 
 Being moved by Nature, were a very fire, 
 And boil'd in apprehension of a wrong; 
 Yet should his 7>iind hold such a sceptre there 
 As would contain it from all act and thought 
 Of treachery or ingratitude to his prince. 
 
 Yet again, in An Humobous Day's Mibth, Count 
 Labervele says of his wife (I. i.) : 
 
 'Tis to be doubted that when an object comes 
 Fit to her humour, she will intercept 
 Behgious letters sent unto her mind. 
 And yield unto the motion of her blood. 
 
 and in C^esab and Pompey (III. i. 17) we have the variant : 
 
 That what decay soever blood inferr'd 
 
 Might with my mind's store be supplied and cheer'd. 
 
 In The Tbaes op Peace we have yet another statement 
 of the thought : 
 
 There is a joy of conl; and why not then 
 A grief of soul, that is no scathe to men ? 
 For both are passions, though not such as reign 
 In blood and humour, that engender pain. 
 
 ' Cp. Hamlet, III. ii. 74. 
 
 » One of two lines (between 173 and 174) not accepted in Professor 
 Farrott's edition. 
 
SPECIAL CLUES TO CHAPMAN 71 
 
 And though he reflects in another passage that : 
 
 Strange cross in nature, purest virgin shame 
 Lies in the blood, as lust lies, and together 
 Many times mix too 
 
 {Bevenge of Bussy D'Ambois, I. ii. 33), 
 
 Chapman many times uses "blood" in this (the ordinary 
 Elizabethan) figurative application. "We have the idea in 
 the first book of his Iliad translation (1. 195) : 
 
 While these thoughts striv'd in his blood and mind; 
 
 again in the third book (229) : 
 
 I learn'd the wisdom of their souls, and humours of their blood, 
 
 and again in the 20th Odyssey (292-3) : 
 
 Being a man as well 
 Given to his mind's use as to buy and sell, 
 Or do the drudgery that the blood desir'd. 
 
 9. Again, the " precious " line (67) : 
 
 Her grievance with his hearing to divide 
 
 has many analogues in Chapman. E.g. : 
 
 Nor do I hope but even your high affairs 
 
 May suffer intermixtiu:e with her [Poesy's] view. 
 
 Sonnet to Earl of Northumberland, with Uiadg. 
 
 Nor doth he [Tityus] ever labour to divide 
 His liver and their [the vultures'] beaks. 
 
 11th Odyssey, 788. 
 
 Never endure that any roof shall part 
 Mine eyes and heaven. 
 
 Bussy D'Ambois, V. iv. 199. 
 
 I swear that divides , 
 
 Your wondering reader far from your applause. 
 
 Justification of Perseus and Andromeda. 
 
72 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 10. The equally fantastic passage (17-18) : 
 
 Laundering the silken figures in the brine 
 That seaaon'd woe had pelleted in teart, 
 
 recalls : 
 
 Season'd with tea/ra her joys to see more joys the more offence. 
 
 8rd lUad, 161 , 
 
 and 
 
 How his tears led others, all the fane 
 Flowing with such brine-seasoning parts humane. 
 
 Eugenia, Vigil, 3, 
 
 It is to be noted that similar figures about tears, brine, and 
 seasoning occur twice in the Shakespeare plays : 
 
 And water once a day her chamber round 
 
 With eye-offending brine : all this to season 
 
 A brother's dead love. 
 
 Twelfth Night, I. i. 29. 
 
 'Tis [tears] the best brine a maiden can season her praise in. 
 
 All's Well, I. i. 55. 
 
 We shall have occasion to consider later whether in both 
 cases it is Shakespeare who uses this tag. Here, then, in a 
 long series of instances, we have the very preciosity, the 
 odd contortion of thought and language, which Professor 
 Mackail notes as pervading the Complaint. And in no 
 contemporary of Shakespeare's can it be so paralleled as 
 in Chapman. 
 
 11. We find him again in the passage (78) : 
 
 If I had self-applied 
 Love to myself and to no love beside. 
 
 Such tautology, in pursuit of metre, points to Chapman's 
 tic of combining "self" with other words. He has, for 
 instance : 
 
 Self-ability, self-tire (" the self-tire barking dogs," 16th Od. 5), self- 
 store (" served with self-store," 5th Od. 664), self-humour, self-lives, 
 self-fortunes, self-desire, self-greatest, self-estates, self-loved, self-loves, 
 self-race, self-distinction, self-powers, 
 
SPECIAL CLUES TO CHAPMAN 73 
 
 besides such normal forms as self -flattery , self -pitying , self- 
 vraise, self-loving ; and " apply " (see line 68) is one of his 
 words-of-all-use. No other writer employs it so often and 
 so variously, though there are examples in Marlowe, whom 
 Chapman copied in many things. 
 
 12. Students of Chapman will be apt to say that the line 
 in the Complaint (250) : 
 
 Beligious love put out Beligion's eye, 
 
 is very much in his manner. In Bybon's Conspiracy 
 (III. i. 14) we have : 
 
 Storms and clouds mixing suddenly put out 
 The eyes of all those glories, the creation 
 Turn'd into Chaos. 
 
 He is bolder far 
 That present life reaves, but he crueller 
 That, to the to-be-born, envies the light, 
 And puts their eyes out ere they have their sight. 
 
 Andromeda Liberata, near end. 
 
 In the latter passage the idea is that he " wbo, beloved, 
 not yielding love again," refuses to have offspring, is a 
 Homicide; and the phrase "put their eyes out" is thus 
 again metaphorical. It is a Chapmanism. In the transla- 
 tion of the Odyssey we have both the literal and the 
 metaphorical use of the phrase : 
 
 Who past all mean 
 The Muse affected, gave him good and ill. 
 His eyes put out, but put in soul at wilL 
 
 viii. 80. 
 
 And by the wit his [Ulysses'] wits apply 
 He puts him [Polyphemus] out his only eye. 
 
 Argument to 9th Odyssey. 
 
 With his wine 
 Fut out the flame where aU my light did shine.' 
 
 9th Odyssey, 69a. 
 
 ' Note here the " theory of vision " discussed below, p. 86. Homer 
 simply says (516) : " blinded my eye, after overcoming me with wine." 
 
74 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 13. Finally, the odd line (225) : 
 
 0, then, advance of yours that phraseless hand, 
 
 of the affected structure of which Professor Mackail makes 
 note, is simply a case of inversion under stress of rhyme 
 or metre, such as occurs scores of times in Chapman : 
 
 Heaven's white-arm'd Queen (who, everywhere cut short. 
 Beholding her lov'd Greeks, by death), suggested it. 
 
 1st Iliad, 53-54. 
 
 Because I rather wish to err with Cato 
 Than with the truth go of the world besides. 
 
 CcEsar and Pompey, III. i. 117. 
 
 T' enjoy your sight, doth admiration seize 
 My eyes, and apprehensive faculties. 
 
 &th Odyssey, 241-2. 
 
 The Deity lam'd [i.e. Hephaistos] 
 
 7th Odyssey, 125. 
 
 And of both them, she 
 By Pallas' counsel was to have the grace 
 Of foremost greeting. 
 
 Id. 172-4. 
 
 The unhappy wanderer. 
 To too much sorrow whom his, mother bore. 
 
 3rd Odyssey, 132-3. 
 
 With open voice, offended Jupiter 
 Proclaim'd the voyage his repugnant mind, 
 And pour'd the puffs out of a shrieking wind. 
 
 Id. 398-400. 
 
 Him will I 
 His horns in gold hid, give thy Deity. 
 
 Id. 521-2. 
 
 This speech grief to tears 
 (Pour'd from the son's lids on the earth) his ears, 
 Told of the father, did excite. 
 
 4th Odyssey, 144-6. 
 
 Of whom, 80 well remember'd, I should now 
 Acknowledge for me his continual flow 
 Of cares and perils, yet still patient. 
 
 Id. 192-4. 
 
SPECIAL GLUES TO CHAPMAN 75 
 
 With admiration strike 
 His looks my thoughts. 
 
 Id. 179-80. 
 
 When so spritely fly 
 I saw the yellow smoke. 
 
 10th. Odyssey, 193-4. 
 
 This said, they froliokt, came, and lookt upon 
 With admiration the huge-bodied beast. 
 
 Id. 232-3. 
 
 But only that the crying blood for vengeance of my friend. 
 
 18th Iliad, 83. 
 
 All this is like the use of the " split infinitive," of which 
 Chapman is the first notable practitioner, though Bishop 
 Pecock has primitive forms of it. Chapman has at least 
 nine instances : 12th Od. 500 ; 15th Od. 204, 272 ; 17th 
 Od. 327, 700 ; 18th Od. 430 ; Andeomeda : Poems, p. 1826 ; 
 Gbokgics op Hbsiod, ii. p. 232a ; Csisar and Pompey, 
 I. ii. 99. 
 
 In fine, though in simple vocabulary Jonson sometimes 
 chimes with Chapman in the use of words not found in the 
 genuine Shakespeare, no one would suggest that the style 
 or structure of this poem is in the least like Jonson. All 
 the structural clues lead us to Chapman ; and the evidence 
 of vocabulary is corroborative. 
 
§ 7. CHAPMAN'S VOCABULARY COLLATED 
 
 And now for the main lists of more or less completely 
 non-Shakespearean terms noted by Professor Mackail. A 
 number in his first list, it will have been noted, are of 
 comparatively little importance, being nonce-words or 
 chance coinages, such as Chapman especially abounds in. 
 There are, however, several noteworthy forms to be found 
 in Chapman; and the chance coinages are all in his 
 manner. 
 
 In the first list we have : 
 
 1. Maund, occurring, as above noted, in the sixth 
 Odyssey, 105. 
 
 2. Affectedly. — Chapman has : 
 
 Simple, well-meaning, standing still affectedly on telling truth. 
 
 Commentariua on 2nd Iliad. 
 
 3. Invis'd. — Compare : 
 
 The child-god's graceful paradise 
 They jointly purpose to invise. 
 
 Contention of PhilUa and Flora, st. 67. 
 
 4. Unexperient, — Compare : 
 
 Which wisdom sure he leam'd 
 Of hiB experient father. 
 
 AU FooU, I. i. 206. 
 
 To the less notable words in the first list we find 
 suggestive approximations in Chapman : 
 
 5. I have not notedi fluxive ; but he has inflezive, and the 
 following : 
 
 A flux of blood still iBsuing. 
 
 16th Jliad, 483. 
 T6 
 
CHAPMAN'S VOCABULARY COLLATED 77 
 
 The softness and inclination to fluxure. 
 
 Bpist. Ded. to Achilles' Shield. 
 
 With fluenees of sweetest water. 
 
 leth lUad, 224. 
 
 Close to the palm that Inops' fluent cheers. 
 
 Horn. Hym/n to Apollo, 28. 
 
 In which he lighted such a fluent flame. 
 
 Id. 
 
 6. As against untttck'd (applied to hair, I. 31) we have : 
 
 Her tresses in tucka, braided with silver. 
 
 Maale of the Middle Temple, ed. Shepherd, p. 343a. 
 
 Their robes were tucked up before. 
 
 Id. p. 342a. 
 
 7. I have not noted enswath'd; but we have swathe- 
 bands twice in the Hymn to Apollo ; and again thrice in 
 the Hymn to Heembs. And among his participles begin- 
 ning with em and en we have : enrosed (compare en- 
 crimson'd) embathed, enflowered, enlac'd, enambush'd, 
 encnrtain'd, ensulphur'd, enstaging, enstyled. 
 
 8. As against habitude we have : 
 
 To drive men, habited in feast, from feasts. 
 
 2nd Odyatey, 375. 
 
 Habituate powers. 
 
 Busay D'Ambois, V. i. 145. 
 
 y'are a shrewd one, and so habited 
 In taking heed. 
 
 5th Odyaaey, 239. 
 
 9. Annexion is a formation like many of Chapman's, 
 as shown in our list of his nouns in -ion. And as beside this 
 peculiar use of annexion we may note : 
 
 To annex my heart 
 In love to thee as well as victory. 
 
 Blind Beggar of Alexandria, near end. 
 
78 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 It will annex to our belief such love . . . 
 
 Eugenia, Vigil. 3. 
 
 This jewel here annex'd. 
 
 Byron's Tragedy, II. i. 73. 
 
 — which last coincides notably with "annexions of fair 
 gems " in the Complaint. 
 
 10. Threaden does not occur in Chapman's signed work ; 
 but he uses " thread "in a way that gives a similar 
 descriptive effect : 
 
 A oarpet, rich and of devioeful thread. 
 
 Ut Odyssey, 206. 
 
 And so thick thrust together, thread by thread. 
 
 7th Odyssey, 143. 
 
 I'll not receive a thread, but naked go. 
 
 lith Odyssey, 230. 
 
 The web worn bare 
 Of my life's thread. 
 
 21st Odyssey, 371. 
 
 And through thy subject woven her graphic thread. 
 
 In Sejanwm Ben Jonsoni. 
 
 Such forms as sheav'd and lover' d are likewise very much 
 in his manner, as shown in our sample list of his 
 participles : and the same may be said of the adjectives 
 plaintful and phraseless. 
 
 11. The last in particular, both as to the "phrase" and 
 the "-less" — so common a form of coinage with him — 
 points to his diction : 
 
 Beyond the height of phrase 
 You raise expression. 
 
 Zrd Odyssty, S04. 
 
 Amaz'd 
 He stood in mind to hear the dance so phras'd [described]. 
 
 8th Odyssey, 376. 
 
CHAPMAN'S VOCABULARY COLLATED 79 
 
 Bflgh and hearty invention expressed in most significant and 
 unaffected phrase. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to Ovid's Bamquet of Sense, 
 
 In Poeay decking her with choicest phrases. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to Prince Henry. 
 
 Studiers of vhrase. 
 
 Tears of Peace. 
 
 With gifts and junkets, and with printed phrase. 
 
 Byron's Conspiracy, II. ii. 6. 
 
 It may be added that in applying the adjective " phrase- 
 less" (= indescribable) to "hand," Chapman has regard to 
 his own practice. He can rarely speak of a hand without 
 calling it white, or fair, or ivory, or silver. 
 
 The adverbs fastly and weepingly, again, are notably 
 Chapmanesque ; as are the adjectives hrowny and termless. 
 Among his signed words are interminate and disterminate, 
 similar manipulations to the last. Extincture and enpatron, 
 again, are quite in his manner; and he has the verb to 
 patron (Epist. Ded. to Somerset, 1. 34) ; while as against 
 supplicant we have his use of suppliant as an adjective 
 (6th Odyssey, 297), and often as a noun. 
 
 12. Ender I take to have been actually used by Chapman 
 in the Ihad, xvii. 68, where the folio reads: 
 
 His [Sarpedon's] death great Hector's power shall wreak, 
 Ending his ends. Then at once, out shall the fury break 
 Of fierce Achilles. 
 
 Ender is demanded alike by metre and by meaning. 
 Shepherd substitutes evils, which is clearly wrong. 
 Ender is an old and once common word, found in 
 Chaucer. 
 
 13. Blusterer I have not noted in Chapman ; but he has 
 blusters and bluster'd and blustering, and the noun is of a 
 kind he constantly made. 
 
 14. Aloes I do not remember to have seen in Chap- 
 man, but the metaphorical use of the word in the 
 
80 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Complaint (273) is exactly matched in passages of his 
 verse. Compare 
 
 And Bweetens, in the suffering pangs it bears, 
 The aloes of all forces, shocks, and fears, 
 
 with 
 
 I loathe myself, and all my deeds, 
 Like rhubarb taste, or Colchean weeds. 
 
 Trans, of Petrarch's Penitential Psahns, vii. 6, 
 
 Like rhubarb, or the drugs of Thessaly, 
 Compared in taste with that sweet. 
 
 Tears of Peace, Shepherd, p. 1236. 
 
 The metaphor is in all three cases the same, a bitter taste 
 being used to figure a bitter experience, and a spiritual 
 Bweet indicated in contrast. 
 
 15. Sawn. — The Concordance has sawed (2 Henry IV. V. 
 i. 70), and that once only. Chapman has sawn in Cesar 
 AND PoMPET, V. ii. 84, He has also the terms gnawn, 
 bestown, etc. 
 
 Of the second list we find in Chapman : 
 
 1. Forhod: 
 
 But if forbod' 
 To lay profane hands on thy holy priest. 
 
 Trans, of Museeus, 124. 
 
 2. As against acture we have : 
 
 Amplifying no more than is needful for the full f acture of it. 
 Justification of a Strange Action of Nero : 
 Fref. to the Beader. 
 
 What . . . 
 
 Taught thee the sovereign factwra of them all. 
 
 Horn. Hymn to Hermes. 
 
 Whom Fame gives the prize 
 For depth and f acture of all forge-devize. 
 
 Hymn to Fwfcan. 
 
 This form occurs in Marlowe, trans, of Ovid's Elegies, III. ix. 85. 
 Forboden is old. 
 
CHAPMAN'S VOCABULARY COLLATED 81 
 
 Compare his other nouns in ure, as sampled above. 
 
 3. As against sistering we have in Sir Giles Goosecap, 
 after a pun on "cozen'd," the form "uncle'd"; and 
 "sister-flames" in The Amorous Zodiac, st. 11. 
 
 4. I have not noted impleach'd in Chapman ; but he several 
 times uses implied (also the noun implies) in the same 
 sense. 
 
 5. Encrimson'd, as above noted, is matched by enrosed. 
 He also has impurpled. 
 
 6. Paled is, as Mr. Mackail suggests, probably only a 
 varicint spelling of " pallid." ^ Neither word occurs else- 
 where in Shakespeare ; but " pallid " is found frequently in 
 Chapman : 
 
 Pallid and lean is thy elected. 
 
 Contention of PJdllis and Flora, at. 32. 
 
 She is not Moon-like, that, the Sun her spouse 
 Being furthest off, is clear and glorious, 
 And, being near, grows pallid and obscure. 
 
 A Good Woman. 
 
 The sight amaz'd them ; pallid fear made boldest stomachs stoop. 
 
 Trans, of Iliad, viii. 65. 
 
 Like pallid lightnings thrown from Jove. 
 
 Id. X. 137. 
 
 PalUd silver. 
 
 Id. ib. 374. 
 
 PalUd fear. 
 
 Trans, of Hymn to Venue. 
 
 Pallid moon. 
 
 Trans, of Politianus, pref. to Iliads. 
 
 And though I have not noted in Chapman elsewhere the 
 phrase "pallid pearls," the touch of " rubies red as blood " 
 points to several of his : 
 
 Through whose white skin, softer than soundest sleep, 
 With damask eyes the ruby blood doth peep. 
 
 Hero and Leander, iii. 40. 
 
 Spenser has both palled and pallid. 
 
 6 
 
82 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 The virgin tapers that on th' altar stood 
 
 When she inflam'd them, burn'd as red as blood. 
 
 Id. iv. 129. 
 
 The rw&2^-coloured maid. 
 
 Trans, of Musseus, 1. 203. 
 
 His (the ox's) life-blood pouring out at every wound, 
 In streams as clear as any liquid ruby. 
 
 Cmaar and Pompey, III. ii. 15. 
 
 The third list yields us our largest harvest of Chapman- 
 parallels ; and as this consists of words used by Shakespeare 
 in a different sense, their occurrence in Chapman has 
 special evidential force. We have noted that fickle is 
 probably a misprint (though if any man could use the word 
 in the sense oi fragile, Chapman was the one to do it) ; that 
 occasion is probably only a loose use of the word by him in 
 its normal sense ; and that parcels means only " portions," 
 which is its usual force. Phoenix, again, seems to me to 
 mean here only "new-born"; and "Phoenix" is a 
 favourite allusion-word with Chapman. E.g. : 
 
 As if the phoenix hasting to her rest 
 
 Had gather'd all th' Arabian spicery 
 T' embalm her body in her tomb, her nest. 
 
 Ovid's Banquet, st. 32. 
 
 How am I burnt to dust 
 With a new sun, and made a novel phoenix. 
 
 An Hy/morous Day's Mirth, so. 7, 1. 208, ed. Farrott. 
 
 Behold the kingly flight of his [Homer's] high Muse, 
 And see how, like the phoenix, she renews 
 Her age and starry feathers in your sun. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to Prince Henry, with Twelve Books of lUad. 
 
 Like the young phoenix 
 That from her spicy pile revives more glorious. 
 
 Bevenge of Honour, V. 2. 
 
 Professor Parrott, with strong grounds, pronounces against 
 Chapman's authorship of the last-cited play ; but the 
 passage may at least serve to explain the allusion in the 
 
CHAPMAN'S VOCABULARY COLLATED 83 
 
 Complaint. Other words in the Hst are specially identifi- 
 able as Chapman's : 
 1. Storming. In our poem, besides the line (7) : 
 
 Storming her world with sorrow's wind and rain, 
 
 we have (101) : 
 
 Yet, if men moved him, was he such a storm 
 As oft 'twixt May and April is to see. 
 
 This is a tic of Chapman's : 
 
 With this digression we will now return 
 To Ovid's prospect in his fancy's storm. 
 
 Ovid's Banquet of Sense, st. 57. 
 
 Do not, as others I would, of custom storm. 
 
 Id. 83. 
 
 Golden storms 
 Fell from their eyes. 
 
 Hero and Leander, v. 184. 
 
 He entered at the eye ; his [Love's] sacred storm , 
 
 Kose from the hand. 
 
 Id. V. 228. 
 
 Now on thy Ufe have death's cold vapours storm'd, 
 That storni'dst on men, the earth-fed, so much death. 
 
 Horn. Hymn to Apollo. 
 
 Stonmny upon him stUl their fiercest force. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to Earl of Somerset, with lUada. 
 
 He whose bow thus storm'd. 
 
 Trans, of Iliad, i. 148. 
 
 O, at this, 
 
 Juno will storm. 
 
 Id. 1. 501. 
 
 His princes, amorous of their chief, walked storming here and 
 
 there. 
 
 Id. ii. 
 
 Whole storms of lances. 
 
 Id.y. 
 
 Father, storm'st thou not 
 To see us take these wrongs from men. 
 
 Id. V. 
 
84 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 What course intend you? Why are you wrapped with your 
 fancy's storm. 
 
 Id. viii. 
 
 Our foes 
 May calm their storma. 
 
 Id. xiv. 
 
 And therefore pour'd on darts in ttormi. 
 
 Id. ih. 
 
 S^orm-like he fell. 
 
 Bussy D'Ambois, II. i. 
 
 You know, besides, that our affections' storm, 
 Baised in our blood, no reason can reform. 
 
 Id. II. i. 
 
 What a vapour 
 The strongest mind is to a storm of crosses. 
 
 Byron's Tragedy, V. i. 
 
 He doubts, storms, threatens, rues, complains, implores. 
 
 Id. V. i. 
 
 One gentle word from thee would soon resolve 
 The storm of my rage to a shower of tears. 
 
 All Fools, II. i. 
 
 Methinks thy wit should feel how stale are these love storms. 
 
 May-Day, I. ii. 
 
 that thy life could have dispers'd death's storms. 
 
 Epicedium, ed. Shepherd, p. 1696, 
 
 Every god will have his son a god 
 Or storm extremely. 
 
 Trans, of Iliad, xvi. 
 
 An empty gallant, full of form, 
 That thinks each look an act, each drop a storm. 
 
 Hero and Leander, vi. 
 
 There was a storm in Hero's heart. 
 
 Id. ih. 
 
 The scandals storm'd 
 Against the poor dame. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to Prince Henry, pref. to Iliad, 
 
 Storm not, nor beat yourself thus 'gainst the doors. 
 
 Bussy D'Ambois, V. 
 
CHAPMAN'S VOCABULARY COLLATED 85 
 
 With atormt of whistlings then his flock he drave. 
 
 9^^ Odyssey, 485. 
 
 And in The Shadow of the Night {Hymnus in Cynthiam) 
 we have the same use made of " tempest " : 
 
 Tempest their wraths on them that wist it not. 
 
 2. Charmed is used in the Complaint (1. 146), as 
 Mr. Mackail notes, in the sense of exercising charm. It is 
 a Chapman use. " Charms " occurs in his verse many 
 times, always in the old sense of "amulets" or " spells " ; 
 and in the description of Teras in the fifth sestiad of Hebq 
 AND Leandeb (1. 75) it is told that 
 
 Never shght tale flew 
 From her charm'd Kps without important sense. 
 
 There is really no fundamental difference between this 
 and his normal use of the word (seen in the line 193) : the 
 idea is that the organ or object or person has been affected 
 or endowed with special or " charming " power, as here : 
 
 Your spirit, cha/rm'd 
 In birth with Wisdom's virtues. 
 
 Sonnet 20, to Viscount Cranborne. 
 
 As if they came perfumed and charmed with golden incitements. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to Hero and Leander, 
 
 In him, aa in a crystal that is charm'd, 
 I shall discern by whom and what designs, 
 My power is threatened. 
 
 Byron's Tragedy, I. i. 
 
 And last, the eharmid plate he wore. 
 
 Trans, of Iliad, iv. 
 
 They are not charm'd against your points of steel . . . 
 
 LI iv. 
 
 Beligiou charmed 
 That act of spoil, 
 
 I^, vi. 
 
86 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Who being Bhown 
 His cha/rmed shield, his half he turn'd to stone. 
 
 Andromeda Liber ata. 
 
 Through whose charmid mouths 
 We may see all the close scapes of the court. 
 
 Bussy D'Amhois, III. ii. 158. 
 
 3. Radiance. Concerning the lines (213-14) : 
 
 The deep-green emerald, in whose fresh regard 
 Weak sights their sickly radiance do amend, 
 
 Mr. Mackail notes that radiance is here used "in a highly 
 technical sense = power of vision, in accordance with a 
 particular theory as to the nature of the sense of sight." 
 The theory, such as it is, will be found again and again in 
 Chapman — in The Shadow of Night ; in Ovid's Banquet, 
 , passim ; in Heed and Lbandek (third sestiad and Tale 
 of Teras) ; in Eugenia (Vigil. 3), and elsewhere. And the 
 use of " radiance " above noted conforms to his diction in 
 such passages as : 
 
 Those that beforehand have a radiant and light-hearing intellect. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to Ovid's Banquet, end. 
 
 Effuse his radiance upon knowing men. 
 
 JusHfication of Perseus and Andromeda, 1. 33. 
 
 But when he view'd her radiant eyes again 
 Blind was he stricken with her fervent beams. 
 
 An HwmoroviS Day's Mirth, ed. Shepherd, p. 406. 
 
 The visible and mild radiance of mine eyes. 
 
 Byron's Conspiracy, III. i. 
 
 Whose virtue Helen felt, and knew, by her so radiant eyes. 
 
 Trans, of IKad, iii. 415. 
 
 Her radiant eyes. 
 
 Sir Giles Gooiecap, I. iv. 7. 
 
 |Ii« radiant eye. 
 
 Id, V, u. 271. 
 
CHAPMAN'S VOCABULARY COLLATED 87 
 
 The idea that the eyes shed light, sometimes put quasi- 
 literally, sometimes metaphorically, sometimes allegorically, 
 is further illustrated in such passages as these : 
 
 For as the eye discerns not black from white, 
 Colour from sound, till with a noble light 
 The soul casts on it, it is made descry ; 
 So still the soxil's blank intellectual eye 
 The world's soul rinseth in his active rays, 
 And her raz'd table fills with forms. 
 
 Eugenia, Vigil. 3. 
 
 From his eyes, as if the day-star rose, 
 A radiance terrifying men did all the state enclose. 
 
 19th Iliad, 18. 
 
 But who dares abjure 
 His conscious knowledge, and belie the law, 
 Past cure will that wound in his conscience draw, 
 And for his radiance now his race shall be 
 The deeper plunged in all obscurity. 
 
 Trans, of Hesiod'a Georgics, Bk. 1. 
 
 In the 9t^ Odyssey (702) the blinded Cyclops shouts to 
 Ulysses, concerning the destroyed eye, that his sire " Can 
 soon re-pose it in the visual fire," which last phrase is not 
 in Homer, but Chapman's own. 
 
 Finally, in the translation of the Homeridian Hymn to 
 Hermes, Apollo asks the old man: 
 
 To me then declare 
 O old man, long since bom, if thy grave ray 
 Hath any man seen making stealthful way 
 With all those oxen, 
 
 which again gives us the theory of visual rays or 
 " radiance." 
 
 4. Impress (1. 267), "in the sense of strike against or 
 attack," is one of Chapman's common specialties of phrase. 
 His Homeric heroes often " impress " their weapons, and 
 an " impression " is for him an attack : 
 
 Haste, for the king of man commands, to see a wound imjpress'd 
 
 In Menelaus, great in arms. 
 
 Trans, of lUad, iv. 222, 
 
88 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 So, after Diomed, instantly, the field was overcome 
 
 With thick impressions of the Greeks. 
 
 JUad, iv. 454, 
 
 And first Hypsibios Liohenor wounded, 
 Standing th' impression of the first in fight. 
 
 Battle of Frogs and Mice. 
 
 The chill impressions of the north-east sky. 
 
 Trans, of Fifth Satire of Juvenal. 
 
 In whose guts the King of men impress'd 
 His ashen lance. 
 
 lUad, vi. 63. 
 
 What Trojans then were to their deaths by Teucer's shafts impress'd ? 
 
 Id. viii. 234. 
 
 In ten whole years they shall not heal the wounds I will impress. 
 
 Id. ib. 352. 
 
 Then did his [Telamon's] lance impress 
 Fandocus, and strong Pirasus, Lysander and Falertes. 
 
 Id. xi. 431. 
 
 His sword a mortal wound impress'd. 
 
 Id. ib. 100. 
 
 Nor yet his lance left dealing martial alms, 
 But Socua' brother by both sides, young Carops, did impress. 
 
 Id. ib. 380. 
 
 Antiolochus Atymnius seized, his steel lance did impress 
 
 His first three guts. 
 
 Id. xvi. 301. 
 
 Impressing a recureless wound. 
 
 Id. ib. 446. 
 
 He sometimes uses the word with another force; but in 
 this sense it is " Chapman, his mark." 
 
 5. Sufferiiig, with the force of "painful," is also a sample 
 of Chapman's diction. The word occurs thrice in the 
 Complaint : 
 
 Which may her suffering ecstasy assuage (69). 
 Have of my suffering youth some feeling pity (178). 
 And sweetens, in the suffering pangs it bears (272). 
 
 It is not SO much a matter of making " suffering " mean 
 " pgiinful " as of simply placing the participle-adjective 
 
CHAPMAN'S VOCABULARY COLLATED 89 
 
 alongside of a noun and getting that result, as in the 
 analogous phrase "caged cloister." (Compare "my 
 bleeding moan," 9th Odyssey, 27.) Chapman very fre- 
 quently uses the words suffer, suffering, and sufferance 
 (= suffering) ; and from time to time his mere syntax 
 produces the effect in question : 
 
 Not that we may not bear a suffering ihoio 
 In our afQictions. 
 
 Eugenia, Vigil. 3. 
 
 Most suffering-minded Tydeus' son. 
 
 5<;^ Iliad, 276. 
 
 Giving him a fate 
 More suffering than the most unfortunate. 
 
 1st Odyssey, 84. 
 
 My most-suffering father. 
 
 Zrd Odyssey, 119. 
 
 Through every fight, and every suffering deed. 
 
 Uh Odyssey, 322. 
 
 Through all 
 My suffering course. 
 
 nth Odyssey, 180. 
 
 My mind spreads her impassive powers 
 Through all my suffering parts. 
 
 Qentleman Usher, IV. i. 
 
 It is tolerably clear that it is the same hand that produces 
 all the verbal effects under notice. 
 
 6. Distract (adj. 231) — with which should be bracketed 
 distractedly (28). The adverb occurs only once in 
 Shakespeare : 
 
 She did speak in starts, distractedly, 
 
 {Twelfth Night, II. ii. 22) 
 
 — a somewhat different force from that before us. This 
 occurs in Chapman : 
 
 Juno's enforced and wrathful parting from Jove, and doing bis 
 charge distractedly. 
 
 Comm, oa I5th Iliad, note 1, end. 
 
90 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Distract as an adjective or participle occurs several times in 
 the translation of Homer : 
 
 Like one turn'd wild, look'd on himself in his distract retreat. 
 
 nth lUad, 475. 
 
 And either knowing not his way, or then would let alone 
 His proposed journey, is distract. 
 
 15th Iliad, 81. 
 
 Who put me thus together, thus distract 
 In aged pieces. 
 
 16th Odyssey, 272 ; 
 
 also in the plays : 
 
 O wretched piety, that art so distract 
 In thine own constancy. 
 
 Bussy D'Ambois, V. iv. 167 ; 
 
 and elsewhere : 
 
 She stood distract with miserable woes. 
 
 Trans, of Musseus, line 12 from end. 
 
 My powers with admiration stand ^stract. 
 
 Horn. Hymn to Hermes. 
 
 The meaning — physical or mental — is always simply 
 "divided"; and Chapman repeatedly used "distracted" 
 and " distraction " with the same force, as does Shake- 
 speare. For the Elizabethans, that was the primary 
 meaning: "mad" is secondary. 
 
 Coming to the fourth list, we again find clues to 
 Chapman. 
 
 1. Amplify is a fairly common Elizabethan word ; but 
 whereas we find it only thrice in the Shakespeare plays, 
 it occurs many times in Chapman : 
 
 More than to amplify 
 Adorn, and sweeten these, deservedly. 
 
 Tea/ra of Peace, ed. Shepherd, p. 124a. 
 
 He never ceased to amplify his store, 
 
 Eugenia, Vigil. 1, 
 
CHAPMAN'S VOCABULARY COLLATED 91 
 
 To amplify yet more the divine graces of this goddess. 
 
 Arg. of Mash of the Inner Temple. 
 
 He took a bunch of laurel, amplified 
 Past others. 
 
 Horn. Hymn to Hermes, Shepherd, p. 291a. 
 
 I amplifying no more than is needful for the full facture of it. 
 
 Justification of Strange Action of Nero, pref. to Reader. 
 
 Fair, and with all allurements amplified. 
 
 Hymn to Venus, Shepherd, p. 303a. 
 
 Which (as yourself requires and reason wills) 
 I leave to be enforced and amplified. 
 
 Monsieur D'Olive, II. i. 
 
 Is amplified with just command of many. 
 
 1st Iliad, 279. 
 
 And see Troy amplified 
 In conquest. 
 
 Id. 489. 
 
 Nor, would he amplify all this like sand, or dust, or brass, 
 Should he reclaim me. 
 
 9th Iliad, 375. 
 
 Content be his great heart 
 With his great portion, and not think to amplify his part. 
 
 Uth Iliad, 182. 
 
 Short life well graced might amplify. 
 
 1598 version of \st Iliad, Shepherd, p. 5416. 
 
 As infinite as leaves 
 Or flowers the spring doth amplify. 
 
 1598 version of ^nd IKad, Shepherd, p. 558&.- 
 
 Which . . . Ulysses amplified to this ascent. 
 
 8th Odyssey, 651. 
 
 A roof, in size more amplified. 
 
 9th Odyssey, 730. 
 
 StUl amplified his plaint. 
 
 11th Odyssey, 100. 
 
 2. Brokers is also a word of no great evidential import- 
 ance, the point being that the plural is found only in 
 Hamlbt in the genuine Shakespeare. The singular occurs 
 
92 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 several times in Chapman as in Shakespeare, once with the 
 metaphorical force: 
 
 They know the way to the petty broker's, there let them shift 
 and hang. 
 
 Monsieur D'OKve, IV. i. 
 
 Now like a decayed merchant turned broker. 
 
 Widow's Tears, I, iv. 
 
 And therefore that true knowledge that should be 
 Their studies' end, and is in nature free, 
 Will not be made their broker. 
 
 Tears of Peace, Shepherd, p. 1176. 
 
 " Petty broker " occurs half a dozen times in one scene of 
 Monsieur D'Olive (III. ii.). 
 
 3. Concave occurs in the second Iliad, 507. Chapman 
 has also concaves (19th Od. 600 ; Mask op Middle Temple : 
 Poems, p. 3436) and concavity (Blind Beggar, Sc. 2). 
 
 The forms reword and cautel 1 have not noted in his 
 signed work ; but he has : 
 
 Worded : Gentleman Ushbr, IV. i. 70 ; Tears of Pbacb, end. 
 Cautelous : Hymn to Hermes : Poems, p. 2966. 
 
 Concerning pieced, I would say that it is simply a meta- 
 phorical use, with the force of " eked out." In this sense 
 it is a common word, and it is so used by Chapman 
 (Odyssey, xix. 694). 
 
 4. Commixed, which occurs only in the Complaint (1. 28) 
 and in the late Cymbeline in the Shakespeare concordance, 
 is a common word of Chapman's : 
 
 And then like flame and powder they oommixt. 
 
 Bussy D'Ambois, II. i. 
 
 And show, commix'd with them, the joys, the glories 
 
 Of his state then. 
 
 Eyron't Conspiracy, V. i. 
 
 And in one cup of friendship to commix 
 Our lives q.nd fortunes, 
 
 Pyrqn't Tragedy, III. i, 
 
CHAPMAN'S VOCABULARY COLLATED 93 
 
 That she the gods commixed in amorous play. 
 
 Horn. Hymn to Venus. 
 
 Yet with his admirable stream doth not his waves commix. 
 
 Trans, of Iliad, ii. 
 
 iEneas of commixed seed (a Goddess with a man). 
 
 Id. ih. 
 
 With flight and clamour still loommix'd. 
 
 Id. iv. 
 
 A most inevitable flight ; both slaughters so commix'd. ' 
 
 Id. xiv. 
 
 By which time Hector was revived, and, taking horse again 
 Was far commix'd within his strength. 
 
 Id. xi. 
 
 There youths and maids with beauties past compare 
 Danc'd with commixed palms. 
 
 Trans, of Achilles' Shield. 
 
 But harmful venoms she commixt with these. 
 
 IQth Odyssey, 320. 
 
 5. Orbed I have not met with in Chapman : but he has : 
 
 1 
 orbicular : Hero and Lbandbk, iii. 
 orbiguity : Epist. Ded. with Achilles' Shield. 
 orby : Odyssey, x. 588 ; Iliad, iii. 357 ; xiii. 151 ; 
 
 and is thus much given to manipulations of orb, as also to 
 the term " circular " in a metaphorical and mystical sense. 
 In the seventeenth Iliad, rendering the simile of the 
 curriers pulling on a hide, he has (340) : 
 
 in an orb they pull, 
 
 here following the in orbem of Spondanus, where Homer 
 (392) has kukXcct', in a wheel. In the Iliad and the Odyssey 
 he uses sphered with that force. Again, he frequently 
 has ensphere, in various flections. 
 
 6. Dialogue. — This rather notable verb seems to point 
 
94 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 distinctly to Chapman. In An Humoeous Day's Mirth, 
 Sc. vi. 25, Labervele says : 
 
 I'll have a dialogue between myself 
 And manly reason to that special end ; ' 
 
 which gives the idea of the passage in the Complaint : 
 
 Consents bewitoh'd, ere he desire, have granted ; 
 And dialogued for him what he would say, 
 Ask'd their own wills, and made their wills obey. 
 
 I leave for separate discussion the important point that in a 
 non- Shakespearean part of Timon of Athens (II. ii. 52) we 
 have the phrase: "Dost dialogue with thy shadow?" 
 
 7. Beal is a word that calls for some attention. It occurs 
 nowhere else in the poems, and only twice in the plays. 
 As to one of these uses we shall have occasion to inquire 
 later. The word is notable as having come into general 
 literary use only in the last decades of the sixteenth century, 
 though " the real presence " was an old formula in theology. 
 The first literary use noted in the Oxford Dictionary is the 
 allusion to this among other " new-minted epithets " 
 ascribed to Jonson by Marston in the introduction to his 
 ScoUBGE OP ViLLANiE, 1599. But the word has been used 
 twice in one line by Marston himself in the third of his 
 Satires (1. 15 from end), published in the same volume with 
 PiGMALiON in 1598 ; and it was in literary use much earlier 
 still. It occurs at least a dozen times in Eeginald Scot's 
 DiscovERiE OP Witchcraft, 1584 ; and is found in Carew's 
 translation of Huarte's Examen de Ingenios, 1574 
 (ed. 1596, p. 161). I have not noted it in Chapman's 
 earlier work, but it was likely to be adopted by him ; and 
 it occurs in the Tears of Peace (Poems, p. 122a) ; and in 
 the verses "To the Eeader" prefixed to the Ihad. 
 
 A few of the less notable words in the various lists, which 
 
 ' The idea would be Buggested by the Iliad — Chapman's version, 
 Xi. 859 seq. ' 
 
CHAPMAN'S VOCABULARY COLLATED 95 
 
 I have not chanced to note in Chapman — though another 
 reader may — I have left undiscussed. They are all 
 perfectly likely to have been used, and some of them to 
 have been coined, by him. But the number of actual clues 
 to him, the many coincidences of thought and of phrase, 
 the identities of theme and machinery, the general preva- 
 lence of his eccentric diction in the Complaint, the 
 constant suggestion of his involved and forced construction, 
 with the occasional emergence of vigorous lines and once of 
 real elevation — all this constitutes, I think, a culminating 
 proof that the poem is Chapman's. It is, in brief, as like 
 him as it is unlike Shakespeare. 
 
 It remains to realize the biographical significance of the 
 discovery. 
 
PART II 
 THE POETS' PERSONAL RELATIONS 
 
PART II 
 THE POETS' PERSONAL RELATIONS 
 
 § 1. EARLY RIVALRY 
 
 That there was a literary connection or relation, partly 
 somewhat hostile, between Chapman and Shakespeare, is 
 fairly evident even apart from the sonnets which allude to 
 the rival poet. We can follow Chapman's non-dramatic 
 literary career from about 1593, in or before which year he 
 made the friendly acquaintance of Marlowe, who urged the 
 publication of his Shadow of Night, thus known to date 
 before the year of its issue. That he had been settled in 
 London may be gathered from his account of himself as 
 " hasting out of town " when finishing the dedication to 
 his poem in 1594. And we may reasonably agree with 
 Mr. Acheson that the dedications of that poem and of 
 Ovid's Banquet op Sense in the following year, both 
 addressed to his friend Matthew Eoydon, tell of failure 
 to find a distinguished patron, which he would evidently 
 have liked to do. 
 
 The Shadow may be described as an anti-popular poem, 
 written in rather splenetic contempt of all common 
 pleasures, literary and other. Popularity it certainly never 
 won ; and the phrase, " I know that empty and dark spirits 
 will complain of palpable night," in the dedication of the 
 Banquet, tells of criticism passed on the first poem. 
 Meantime, Shakespeare's Venus and Adonis had been 
 followed by the Luceecb, and both had a popular success. 
 Chapman accordingly had so far learned his lesson that, like 
 Drayton and others, he set himself to produce a rival poem 
 to the Venus, probably setting about it in 1594. In each 
 case he would seem to have written his poem first for 
 
100 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 private circulation, before trying it on the general public. 
 Already, presumably, he had written his continuation of 
 Hero and Lbandbr; and the withholding of that piece 
 from publication — the reasons for which can be guessed at — 
 would impel him to yet another adventure in amorous 
 poetry, this time following his own bent and not Marlowe's. 
 What he never learned was the importance of lucidity and 
 limpidity-. Conscious above all things of his scholarly 
 knowledge and his " virtuosity " in language, he determined 
 to eclipse the limpid appeal of the young Shakespeare's 
 verse by something more accomplished, more skilful, more 
 indicative of knowledge and philosophy ; something to 
 represent " the divine discipline of Poesy," as he put it in 
 his dedication to the Banquet. The whole document 
 tells that he is still writing in opposition to other men's 
 methods : 
 
 "The profane multitude I hate, and only consecrate my strange 
 poems to those searching spirits whom learning hath made noble, and 
 nobility sacred ; endeavouring that material oration, which you call 
 Schema ; varying, in some rare fiction, from popular custom, even for 
 the pure sakes of ornament and utility. 
 
 " But that Poesy should be per vial [:= obviously intelligible] as 
 oratory, and plainness her special ornament, were the plain way to 
 barbarism,' and to make the ass run proud of his ears, to take away 
 strength from lions, and give camels horns. 
 
 ." That Energia, or clearness of representation, required in absolute 
 poems, is not the perspicuous delivery of a low invention ; but high and 
 hearty invention expressed in most significant and unaffected phrase. 
 It serves not a skilful painter's turn to draw the figure of a face only to 
 make known what it represents ; but he must Umn, give lustre, shadow, 
 and heightening; which though ignorants will esteem spiced, and too 
 curious, yet such as have the judicial perspective will see that it hath 
 motion, spirit, and life. 
 
 " There is no confection made to last, but it is admitted more cost and 
 skill than presently-to-be-used simples ; and in my opinion, that which, 
 being with a little endeavour searched, adds a kind of majesty to Poesy, 
 is better than that which every cobbler may sing to his patch. 
 
 ' The syntax of Chapman's very prose conforms to his vow against 
 being " pervial." Here we have one of his innumerable ellipses. 
 
EARLY RIVALRY 101 
 
 " Obscurity in affection [= affectation] of words and indigested 
 conceits is pedantical and childish ; but where it shroudeth itself in the 
 heart of his subject, uttered with fitness of figure and expressive epithets, 
 with that darkness will I still labour to be shadowed. Bioh minerals are 
 digged out of the bowels of the earth, not found in the superficies and 
 dust of it : charms made of unlesirned characters are not consecrate by 
 the Muses, which are divine artists, but by Euippe's daughters, that 
 challenged them with mere nature, whose breasts I doubt not had been 
 well worthy commendation, if their comparison had not turned them 
 into pyes." 
 
 The pedant reveals himself in the act of disclaiming 
 pedantry. Chapman was evidently convinced that he 
 escaped "obscurity in affection of words and indigested 
 conceits" (which had inevitably been imputed to him), 
 by some process of " shrouding himself in the heart of his 
 subject." Later, in The Revenge of Bussy D'Ambois 
 (I. ii. 38-43), he declares that 
 
 As worthiest poets 
 Shun common and plebeian forms of speech ; 
 Every illiberal and affected phrase 
 To clothe their matter; and together tie 
 Matter and form, with art and decency; 
 So worthiest woman should shun vulgar guises. 
 
 It is his fatality that he does not avoid vulgarities even in 
 shunning plainness of speech : no man used grosser images 
 or coarser phrases than some of his ; and still he is pedantic, 
 affected, " indigested," and indigestible, more often than he 
 is clear and powerful. 
 
 That he was writing at Shakespeare among others can 
 hardly be doubted. It is irksome to think of him as often 
 pursuing this ungenerous vein ; and Mr. Acheson, I think, 
 errs in seeing attacks on Shakespeare in some of Chapman's 
 later lines which specifically arraign scholars as such — for 
 instance, in The Tears op Peace ; but the dedication to 
 the Banquet of Sense tells plainly of hostility to successful 
 exploiters of the popular taste for the sensuous. The poem 
 as a whole is just as plainly an attempt to do that kind of 
 
102 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 thing with " cost and skill " of phrase and thought ; and 
 there really is an attainment of lucidity, in contrast with the 
 felt darkness of the Shadow of Night. But, as is usual 
 with Chapman, there is a fatal lack of pagan charm. 
 Shakespeare's "first heir" is something of a scapegrace; 
 but Shakespeare, with his unerring instinct for the tried 
 and telling fable, the enduring tale, easily — too easily — does 
 all he wants to do. Chapman strenuously constructs a 
 much more virtuoso-like narrative, expressly dividing the 
 sensuous into its five components, and courageously going 
 on till he has to stop ; but his tour de force, as sensuous in 
 its way as anything of the period, never caught the general 
 imagination. Mr. Acheson perhaps unduly disparages the 
 Banquet when he reduces it to a story of a naked woman 
 and a Peeping Tom : at least, the same method of analysis 
 will yield no more panegyrical formula for the Venus. The 
 Banquet is really the more interesting performance of 
 the two for any one concerned to look for artistic skill 
 where the "general reader" scents an improper narrative. 
 But in Chapman's case there arises a graver indictment. 
 After all his protestations of concern for the supersensual, 
 one finds a certain perversity — Mr. Acheson calls it humbug 
 — in this academic bid for the suffrages of educated 
 worldlings. 
 
 In the same volume with the Banquet he prints 
 (1) A Coronet fob his Misteess Philosophy, dispar- 
 aging the 
 
 Muses that sing Love's sensual empery; 
 
 and (2) The Amorous Zodiac, closely translated, without 
 avowal, from Gilles Durant's Le Zodiac Amoubeux,' an 
 entirely sensual poem in the stanza form of the Venus. 
 The Coronet, which consists of ten sonnets, is ingeniously 
 surmised by Mr. Acheson to be a poem written to attract 
 
 ' See Sir Sidney Lee's French Benaisiance in England, 1910, 
 pp. 468 aeq. 
 
EARLY RIVALRY 103 
 
 Southampton, as against the Venus. The ninth sonnet 
 ends "with the hnes: 
 
 And never shall my friendlesa verse envy 
 Muses that Fame's loose feathers beautify; 
 
 which, with the opening Kne, suggest a direct attack on 
 that poem. But then comes the enigmatic tenth sonnet, 
 which seems to make sudden retractation of what went 
 before, and ends: 
 
 And let my love adorn with modest eyes 
 Muses that sing Love's sensual emperies. 
 
 The appended words, lucidius olim, suggest that the con- 
 cluding stanza had been imposed on the poem against its 
 plan ; and we can only infer that the poet, offering at once 
 his sensual and his anti-sensual wares, was ready to cater 
 for either kind of demand. His first play. The Blind 
 Bbggae op Alexandria, is of a notable prurience, as is 
 his later comedy, The Widow's Teaes. The most charit- 
 able view of the case is that, like nearly all poets, scholars 
 and dramatists of his age. Chapman was hard put to it to 
 make a living, and that his early poems and his plays were 
 equally efforts to surmount what he makes Ulysses quaintly 
 call " a cruel habit of calamity." 
 
 Meanwhile Shakespeare, having written vdth his amazing 
 facility, after the model of Lodge's Glaucus and Scilla, 
 a long poem in that vein, had produced with still more 
 faciUty, after the model of Daniel's Eosamond, a longer 
 poem on the contrary and more respectable but no less 
 popular theme of the chaste Lucrece. We can see him, 
 still untouched by care, meeting with a mock humility 
 the protests of the good against his first poem by inviting 
 a perusal of the second, with its wholly virtuous theme 
 and colouring. It had been written without effort : reading 
 it, one feels that he could have gone on spinning such 
 stanzas "eight years together, dinners and suppers and 
 
104 SHAKESPEAEE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 sleeping-hours excepted," as Touchstone hath it. And 
 again he triumphantly attains his purpose ; for this was 
 the poet who above all others combined a perfect command 
 of the common taste with the supererogatory genius that, 
 where occasion is, transfigures fable into lasting literature. 
 In the Ltjceece the occasion is not compulsive, and the 
 genius, in point of fact, was still in its nonage. The young 
 Shakespeare, trained on the stage, had no blinding esteem 
 for his public ; and he accordingly gave them just what he 
 knew they could appreciate, a flawless flow of easily tuneful 
 verse, as clear as Avon in summer. And this, again, we 
 can see, was the provokingly popular model that Chapman 
 set himself to eclipse by writing, in the same stanza, a tale 
 of female suffering of another kind, which was to have all 
 those qualities of energia, ornament, invention, " lustre, 
 shadow, and heightening," " with fitness of figure and 
 expressive epithets," which the " absolute poem " required, 
 and which were not present in the LucEBCB. Far from 
 seeking to imitate the limpid style of Shakespeare's poems 
 and early plays, he expressly aims at transcending that by 
 ornate technique. He would dig his "rich minerals out 
 of the bowels of the earth," scorning to take a popular 
 fable, familiar as household words, but once more "varying 
 from popular custom " in a " rare fiction " of his own. 
 
 And this time the rival poem simply came to nothing, 
 because nothing was to be made of it. It is still-born. 
 Shakespeare, doubtless, standing on one foot, could have 
 made a poem on such a theme as long as Luceecb, to the 
 " twentieth echo of an echo," if he had cared. But Shake- 
 speare knew better. Given a well-established fable, with 
 a lasting interest for average mankind and womankind, 
 tuneful embellishment could be carried a long way without 
 setting up fatigue in the Elizabethan public. But the 
 abstract deserted maiden, describing and denouncing the 
 abstract betrayer, could hardly have availed even Shake- 
 speare two editions, and could avail Chapman nothing. 
 
EARLY RIVALRY 105 
 
 To make such an enterprise succeed by mere virtuosity 
 of phrase and vocabulary, superfoetation of " conceit " and 
 stylistic conundrum, was a desperate enterprise ; and even 
 Chapman was bound to give it up. The poem simply 
 stops without finishing. And, by one of the queerest 
 ironies of fate in all literary history, the fragment-that- 
 failed came to light after perhaps fourteen years as a 
 production of the very poet who was to have been eclipsed 
 by it. He at least had to that extent a touch of compen- 
 sating amusement in the piratical publication of his Sonnets. 
 That Chapman got any amusement out of the episode is 
 less likely. For all we know, he may have made some 
 protest. But Chapman, who had published as his own 
 work his nearly literal translation of Durant's Zodiac 
 Amouretjx, was hardly in a position to complain even 
 if a successful poem of his were ascribed to another; 
 and in this case there was no success to claim. He had 
 cause to be grateful if Shakespeare tranquilly let the 
 attribution pass, as he apparently did many of the tam- 
 perings with his name — though as to this too we are 
 in the dark. 
 
 The manner of the preservation of the unfinished poem 
 is of course also matter for guesswork; but we are fully 
 entitled to guess with Professor Mackail that it had found 
 its way into the hands of "the patron," who was probably 
 invited to consider the acceptance of a dedication. If he 
 liked the verse of Shakespeare, he could not like this — even 
 if he saw no allusion to himself in the poem ; and he 
 presumably condemned it, plainly or otherwise, thus in one 
 sense putting the poet out of his misery, whether or not 
 he did so financially. 
 
 So far, then, we have evidence of nothing but a much 
 more splenetic hostiUty to Shakespeare on the part of 
 Chapman than is revealed on Shakespeare's part towards 
 the rival poet in the Sonnets. The collapse of the Com- 
 plaint would not mend matters on Chapman's side ; and 
 
106 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 in the strenuous poem to " M. Harriots," ^ appended to 
 his version of the Shield op Achilles in 1598, he seems to 
 have another fling at the successful popular poet : 
 
 And though to rhyme and give a verse smooth feet. 
 Uttering to vulgar palates passions sweet, 
 Chance often in such weak capricious spirits 
 As in nought else have tolerable merits, 
 Yet where high Poesy's native habit shines, 
 From whose reflections flow eternal lines, 
 Philosophy retired to darkest caves 
 She can discover. 
 
 Of course we cannot be sure that the reference is to 
 Shakespeare : it might apply to a number of poets, and 
 one would prefer to think it had some other mark. 
 
 Assuming it to be meant for him, we can the more readily 
 forgive the unsuccessful poet these signs of soreness if we 
 accept the view of Mr. Acheson and others, so ably 
 elaborated in Mr. Acheson's book, that Shakespeare had 
 already had a humorous thrust or two at Chapman in 
 Love's Labour's Lost. There are more profitable occu- 
 pations than the tracking down of personal allusions in the 
 Elizabethan drama, a procedure which frequently amounts 
 to a wildgoose chase; but in this matter of Shakespeare 
 and Chapman we have already seen somewhat solid reasons 
 for inferring a personal relation ; and our literary inquiry 
 will shortly lead us to further discoveries which make it 
 imperative that we should have under view all the relevant 
 facts. To Love's Labour's Lost, then, we must turn before 
 investigating graver matters. 
 
 ' That is, Master Thomas Harriott or Harriotts, the mathematician, 
 secretary to Baleigh ; not George Heriot, as Professor Parrott says, by 
 a rare oversight, in one of his notes to Sir Qiles Ooosecap. The general 
 excellence of Professor Parrott's editing earns the gratitude of all 
 students. 
 
§ 2. "LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST" 
 
 Before putting the perturbing question, "Who was 
 Holofemes ? " it may be well to set in the front of our 
 inquiry a quite solid datum, first advanced by Mr. Acheson. 
 Every reader of Chapman's Shadow of Night remembers 
 its best couplet : 
 
 No pen can anything eternal write 
 
 That is not steeped in humour of the night. 
 
 But none of the commentators seems to have noted that 
 it has a clear relation to two lines in Love's Labour's 
 Lost (IV. iii. 346-7) : 
 
 Never durst poet touch a pen to write 
 
 Until his ink were tempered with Love's sighs. 
 
 That one poet was thinking of the other's lines seems 
 practically certain. But it is not so certain prima facie, 
 though Mr. Acheson has no misgivings, that it was 
 Chapman who wrote first. The difficulty is not merely 
 that that assumption involves a later date for the Labour 
 than many critics would assign it. There are many 
 grounds for refusing to assent to the position that that 
 must be Shakespeare's first play because of its super- 
 abundance of rhyme. That very fact, taken with the 
 non-popular character of the whole production, makes it 
 unlikely that the poet's company would give him his first 
 innings in such a piece, unfitted as it is to interest an 
 ordinary audience. The poetry, too, is not that of a 
 beginner : there is assurance as well as facility in the whole 
 
 101 
 
108 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 management ; and the most probable theory of its inception 
 is that it was originally commissioned by Southampton, at 
 whose house it was played when it was revived for the 
 Court in 1604. 
 
 But the assumption that Shakespeare's lines are a retort 
 to Chapman will practically commit us to Mr. Acheson's 
 general thesis that the Labour as a whole is a fanciful 
 literary defiance to the doctrines of the Shadow op Night ; 
 that the coterie who are to 
 
 War against your own affections, 
 And the huge army of the world's desires, 
 
 are imagined as following up, with a difference, the ideal of 
 withdrawal from the world that is set out in the poem. 
 And this bold interpretation is not hastily to be accepted. 
 There remain (1) the counter-hypothesis, that Shakespeare's 
 play was the first written, and that Chapman's couplet is 
 a retort upon him ; and (2) the alternative hypothesis that 
 the two lines cited from Shakespeare belong to the revision 
 of 1597, and not to the original play. For the last view 
 there are strong suffrages ; many critics, from Spedding to 
 Craig, having held that the whole of Biron's long speech 
 belongs to the revision. I would submit, in opposition, 
 (1) that the fluid style is early rather than late; (2) that 
 the duplication of lines 302-4 in lines 351-3 tells of a mere 
 re-casting, one of the sets having been in the first version ; 
 and (3) that the occurrence of only two double-endings 
 (both made by the word " woman ") in the whole speech 
 of sixty-seven lines, perfectly compatible with an earlier 
 date, is at least much less likely in a composition of 1697. 
 On the whole matter there can be no certainty ; but if we 
 assign our two lines to 1597 they must be reckoned a retort 
 by Shakespeare on Chapman; ^ while if we assign them to 
 the original play the point is still indeterminate. 
 
 ' The speech in praise of love in Chapman's All Fools (I. i. 92-122) 
 may again be counted an attempt to rival the speech in the Labour. 
 
"LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST" 109 
 
 Seeking to establish his thesis, Mr. Acheson argues ^ that 
 Shakespeare's lines : 
 
 These earthly godfathers of heaven's lights, 
 That give a name to every fixed star, 
 Have no more profit of their shining nights 
 Than those that walk and wot not what they are ; 
 
 are directed against Chapman's way of multiplying names 
 for the moon. But Chapman makes no approach to 
 naming " every fixed star," and this straining of the 
 data tends to weaken the whole case. Equally overstrained 
 is the thesis ^ that Chapman's Amoeous Zodiac is " un- 
 questionably the poem indicated by Shakespeare in the 
 21st Sonnet," seeing that Shakespeare there says his love 
 is as fair 
 
 As any mother's child, though not so bright < 
 As those gold candles fixed in heaven's air. 
 
 Many poets and sonneteers had likened their mistresses 
 to stars before Chapman translated his Zodiac. The 
 surmise may be right ; but it cannot be pronounced " un- 
 questionably " so. And when Mr. Acheson takes the 
 concluding line : 
 
 I will not praise that purpose not to sell, 
 
 as meaning " clearly " that Shakespeare imputes mercenary 
 motives to Chapman and declares that his own sonnets are 
 not meant for publication, we are again away froin solid 
 groimd. The phrase about not praising because not meaning 
 to sell is proverbial; and could hardly mean that a son- 
 neteer or poet extolling his mistress praised her because he 
 meant to sell or publish his verses. The idea has reference 
 to trade: "you praise the wares you want to sell." If 
 Shakespeare were girding at Chapman for writing poems 
 to sell, the gibe would have ill become him : the Venus 
 
 ■ Work cited, p. 87. Id. pp. 65-7. 
 
110 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 and the Ltjcrece were written for the market, to say 
 nothing of the plays. 
 
 We are always met by this kind of danger when we are 
 tempted to press hard a literary hypothesis. But if we 
 restrict the thesis to those two main items of (1) the 
 contact between Chapman's couplet and Shakespeare's 
 countering lines ; and (2) the general notion that the 
 Labour is an extravaganza countering the precepts of 
 the Shadow of Night, we have a reasonable theory enough. 
 It implies that Shakespeare's patron was interested in the 
 play — perhaps suggested it, perhaps even gave some of 
 the topical points. On the whole, it was not a dis- 
 respectful treatment of Chapman ; it rather made much 
 of his poem. 
 
 And though the whole thesis is somewhat speculative, the 
 circumstances, upon a balance, are clearly in favour of 
 the view that Chapman's poem came first, and that 
 Shakespeare answered him. To write the Shadow op 
 Night by way of a fulmination against the gospel of love 
 in the comedy would not have been a thinkable course even 
 for Chapman. It certainly would not be a way to win 
 Southampton's favour, for one thing ; and the labouring 
 of the precept of renunciation of normal life would have 
 been otiose after a play which set forth an attempt at such 
 renunciation and its collapse. On the other hand, the play 
 is quite intelligible as a fanciful and humorous reply to the 
 doctrine of the poem. 
 
 There remains the question of Holofernes, a standing 
 theme of debate among the commentators. Warburton's 
 theory that the pedant stood for John Florio, though it 
 commended itself to the sagacious Farmer, is now generally 
 abandoned.' But Chapman really fits Holofernes very well. 
 
 ■ The Comtesse Chambrun, who adopts it in her interesting pamphlet, 
 Shakespeare et Florio, mabes the striking point that HolofemeB is 
 nearly an exact anagram of lohn Florio. This would go a long way if 
 other data fitted. 
 
"LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST" 111 
 
 As has been more than once pointed out, the accost of 
 Armado to Holofernes (V. i. 86), and the reply: 
 
 Do you not educate youth at the charge-house on the top of the 
 mountain ? 
 Hoi. Or mona, the hill, 
 
 suggest that Chapman, who avowedly came from Hitchin 
 Hill, had been there a schoolmaster. " It is the only 
 hypothesis we have as to his earlier occupation. And alike 
 the pedantries and the vocabulary are curiously suggestive 
 of his style. Doubtless the Eombus of Sidney's Lady of 
 THE Mat, or some other presentment of the stage pedant,* 
 gave the model; but Holofernes points specifically to 
 Chapman. Between Professor Mackail's suggestions that 
 his phrase (V. i. 19) about Armado drawing out " the 
 thread of his verbosity finer than the staple of his argu- 
 ment " is an apt criticism of the style of the Complaint, 
 and Mr. Acheson's contention 4 that Holofernes's criticism 
 of Biron's sonnet (IV. ii.) is a criticism btj Shakespeare of 
 the Banquet op Sense, we are warned of the snares in our 
 path. But if we adhere, as Mr. Acheson should have done, 
 to his surmise that Holofernes represents Chapman.s we 
 find in the pedant's verdict singularly close parodies of the 
 pronouncements before cited from the dedication of the 
 Banquet. The passage: 
 
 Here are only numbers ratified ; but for the elegance, facility, and 
 golden cadence of poesy, caret. Ovidius Naso was the man ; and why 
 indeed Naso, but for smelling out the odoriferous flowers of fancy, the 
 jerks of invention ? Imitwri is nothing, eo doth the hound his master, 
 the ape is keeper, the tired horse his rider, 
 
 ' Later in the play, Nathaniel address Holofernes as the schoolmaster 
 of his parish. 
 
 ' It is worth noting that Chapman's schoolmaster in Thb Gbntlbman 
 UsHEE (II. i. 198-200) speaks quite simply. 
 
 3 Essay cited, p. 67. 
 
 « Work cited, p. 109. 
 
 s Another might perhaps argue that Chapman colldborateAin the play 
 but this view is not open to Mr. Acheson. 
 
112 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 is exactly in that vein — a disparagement of poetry that is 
 merely limpid and popular ; and the allusion to Naso is a 
 caricature vindication, in its author's mouth, of the Banquet, 
 which makes much of the sense of smell. The further 
 undertaking, in the same dialogue, to "prove these verses 
 to be very unlearned, neither savouring of poetry, Vfit, nor 
 invention," is an equally exact presentation of Chapman's 
 fashion of breaking the butterfly on the wheel of his 
 invective. It is not Shakespeare censuring Chapman's 
 poetry : it is Shakespeare genially caricaturing Chapman, 
 the pedantic censor of Shakespeare's and other "pervial" 
 poetry. The chances are that Shakespeare is caricaturing 
 the conversational manner of Chapman, which we can well 
 imagine to have been of that cast ; but the burlesque of the 
 dedication of the Banquet seems documentary. 
 
 Another apparent clue to Chapman which suggests 
 making fun of his talk is the passage (V. i. 21) on 
 
 Such rackers of orthography, as to speak dout, fine, when he should 
 say douht; det, when he should pronounce debt — d, e, b, t, not d, e, t ; 
 he clepeth a calf, cauf; hail,hauf; neighbour vocatur nehour: neigh 
 abbreviated ne. This is abhominable, — which he would call abbomin- 
 able. . . . 
 
 The reference here does not appear to be to the archaistic 
 rhymes of the Shadow op Night, but to another " tic." In 
 Chapman's translations of Homer, and elsewhere, we have 
 such rhymes as would and mould, hold and should, behold 
 and should, gold and would, which tell of a cherished opinion 
 that the elided I in would and other words, and yet other 
 unsounded consonants, should be sounded.^ We can well 
 imagine this doctrine being laid down in schoolmasterly 
 fashion by Chapman in his earlier days in town. The talk 
 about elided I's and b's in the play thus goes far to identify 
 him. Still, the playwright seems to have had in his eye 
 the actual dedication of the Banquet op Sense. 
 
 ' The rhyme /oW — womM occurs also in An Huhobous Day's Mikth, 
 Ist scene ; and we have even aloft and thought in C^sar and Pompby, 
 III. i. 
 
"LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST" 113 
 
 It may be objected to such an inference that it brings 
 the date of the Labour to 1595, which will be widely 
 demurred to. After a special investigation of the Shake- 
 spearean chronology I confess to finding 1595 a not 
 improbable date ; and in any case I would not date the 
 play before 1594. But we must always remember that 
 Elizabethan plays in general, and surely Shakespeare's like 
 the rest, were frequently retouched; and there is nothing 
 arbitrary in such a compromise as dating the Labour 1594, 
 with the motive of the Shadow of Night, and supposing it 
 to have been retouched in 1595 as well as in 1597. And 
 this reasonable supposition, be it observed, admits of the 
 possible adoption of the theory of the late Major Martin 
 Hume, that Don Adriano Armado is a skit upon Don 
 Antonio Perez, who came to England in 1594 ; though that 
 is a thesis I do not undertake to support. 
 
 Neither will I profess to see in Holofernes's jingle about 
 the pretty pleasing pricket a caricature of anything ever 
 published by Chapman. But it is the fact that Chapman 
 is an inveterate punster and alliterationist, putting even 
 into his translation of the Iliad a multitude of idle plays 
 upon words. For instances : 
 
 And yet that little thou esteemst too great a continent. 
 In thy incontinent avarice. 
 
 1st lUad, 170. 
 
 And oast 
 The offal oi all to the deeps. 
 
 Id. 310. 
 
 And as in rnde heaps clos'd 
 
 Though huge goatherds are at their food the goatherds easly yet 
 
 Sort into sundry herds. 
 
 2nd lUad, 405. 
 
 He threw, and forth it shin'd, nor fell but where it fell'd. 
 
 4th lUad, 540. 
 
 . . . That with their fiery industries have so divinely wrought 
 In raising it, in razing it thy power will prove it nought. 
 
 1th Iliad, 387. 
 
 8 
 
114 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 But in his form was quite deform'd. 
 
 10th Iliad, 278. 
 
 Transfixt his armless arm. 
 
 nth lUad, 218. 
 
 The sense, otherwise, is senseless. 
 
 Note on 5th Iliad, 175. 
 
 And show'd her son the sun. 
 
 16th lUad, 177. 
 
 And now the dogs and fowls in foulest use 
 Shall tear thee up. 
 
 Wmd lUad, 289. 
 
 But straight more clear appear'd the strait Antilochus foresaw. 
 
 23rd Iliad, 379. 
 
 Vouchsafe me safe. 
 
 24:th Iliad, 280. 
 
 And taking in his armed arms his sou. 
 
 Argument to 6th Iliad. 
 
 Beeves that were wholly black gave holy flame. 
 
 3rd Odyssey, 11. 
 
 This word gilt including double sense. 
 The double guilt of his incontinence. 
 
 Hero and Lewiider, iii. 25-6. 
 
 Forth did his beauty for his beauty look. 
 
 Id, vi. 
 
 The more kind Neptune rag'd, the more he razed 
 
 His love's life's fort. 
 
 Id. ih. 
 
 Dames maritorious ne'er were meritorious. 
 
 Bussy D'Amhois, II. ii. 33. 
 
 Ships of war whose lasts of powder 
 Are laid, men think, to make them last. 
 
 Id. V. ii. 16-17. 
 
 Such punning — of which I could give twenty more examples 
 — far outgoes Shakespeare's. He puns youthfully in comedy, 
 
"LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST" ll5 
 
 where punning is in character: Chapman puns deter- 
 minedly in serious and in comic work aHke; and in the 
 way of solemn and tedious trifling it would be difficult to 
 outweigh his " Justification of a Strange Action of Nero : 
 The Funeral Oration made at the Burial of one of Poppaea's 
 Hairs." Thrice, in serious work, he uses the phrase 
 "tender tinder." A man so given was likely enough, 
 especially in the earlier days of his career, to commit 
 unpublished exercises in punning verse ; and the self-praise 
 which in the play scene follows the reading of the jingle — 
 
 This is a gift I have, simple, simple ; a foolish extravagant spirit, full 
 of forms, figures, shapes, objects, ideas, apprehensions, motions, revolu- 
 tions : these are begot in the ventricle of memory, nourished in the 
 womb of pia mater, and delivered upon the mellowing of occasion. 
 But the gift is good in those in whom it is acute, and I aoz thankful 
 for it — 
 
 is again close, in caricature, to the dedication of the 
 Banquet. It is a curious detail that in Holofernes's 
 further speech in reply to Nathaniel's praise of him as 
 schoolmaster there occur two words, "ingenious" and 
 " capable," of which Chapman was rather fond ; and the 
 previous tirades against Ignorance are not so much burlesque 
 as iterations of his common burden. The passage, of 
 course, raises the question whether after all Holof ernes Js 
 a caricature of Chapman, and not a contribution to the play 
 by Chapman. I do not pretend to bar such a hypothesis ; 
 but I prefer the other. 
 
 Thus far, it will be observed, we have burlesque without 
 spite: Holofernes is a testy pedant with a vigorous and 
 fluent diction, who plays the schoolmaster in talk. The 
 whole treatment suggests some personal acquaintance. In 
 the last Act, of which the excessive length has often been 
 remarked upon, Holofernes and Armado are personally 
 humiliated in their masque of the Worthies, in a crudely 
 Elizabethan manner. I do not like to think that this scene 
 was of Shakespeare's planning. It is relatively witless as 
 
116 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 well as heartless ; and if Holofernes had been intended to 
 represent Chapman, it lowers a genial literary caricature 
 to the plane of horse-play. That would be in Chapman's 
 own vein, supposing him to have been the caricaturist and 
 not the caricatured. Certainly it is not like Shakespeare ; 
 but we have no ground for saying that it would be unlike 
 Southampton, the patron, whom we are moved to surmise 
 as the " begetter " of the play. If the theory that Chapman 
 was the rival poet be accepted, along with the theory that 
 Southampton did not at all decisively respond to Chapman's 
 overtures, it is readily intelligible that, liking as he did 
 the verse of Shakespeare, he would not care much for that 
 of the rival. And it would be quite in the way of a loose 
 Elizabethan nobleman, of Bohemian tastes, to plan the 
 farce-scene of the masque of the Worthies, in which two 
 caricatured contemporaries are baited. 
 
 Mr. Acheson does not shrink from the thesis that it was 
 Shakespeare who persuaded his patron not to patronize 
 Chapman; but most Shakespeareans, I think, will find 
 the assumption incredible. It is one thing to conceive 
 Shakespeare, girded-at by Chapman for ignorance and 
 artistic simplicity, making such modest rejoinders as 
 we find in the Sonnets, and sketching the caricature 
 of Chapman as Holofernes : it is another thing to con- 
 ceive of him deliberately doing Chapman an ill turn. 
 That would not be in Shakespeare's way. He had the 
 immense advantage over Chapman of being without spleen 
 and without vanity, while Chapman unhappily had a great 
 deal of both ; and nothing we know of him entitles us to 
 associate him with any act of spiteful enmity. 
 
 The snares of Mr. Acheson's quest become particularly 
 obvious when we find him even identifying Shakespeare 
 with the unnamed enemy whom Chapman, in the preface 
 to the complete edition of the Iliad in 1611, denounces as 
 calumniating him by asserting that he translated Homer 
 from Latin versions, not from the Greek. It is inconceivable 
 
"LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST" 117 
 
 that Shakespeare ever did anything of the kind. He, with 
 his " small Latin and less Greek," was the last man to claim 
 to pronounce on such a question ; and surely he was the 
 last man either to trump up or pass on a false charge. That 
 Chapman consulted Latin versions he himself tells us ; and 
 we see that he sometimes follows them more closely than he 
 does the Greek; but that he knew the Greek is just as 
 certain. And in a note on the twelfth Odyssey, 135, he 
 addresses "my learned detractor," a phrase he was not 
 likely to apply to Shakespeare. On Mr. Acheson's own 
 view, he accuses Shakespeare normally of ignorance. 
 Mr. Acheson partly spoils a good case by carrying it beyond 
 reasonable bounds. The theorem that Chapman's terms 
 windsucker and kestrel, applied to his unnamed enemy, 
 point to Shakespeare in respect of his falcon crest, is 
 another extravagance ; as is the discovery of an attack upon 
 Shakespeare in those lines of the Teabs of Peace : 
 
 And how they trot out in their lives the ring 
 
 With idly iterating oft one thing — 
 
 A new-fought combat, an affair at sea, 
 
 A marriage, or a progress, or a plea. 
 
 No news but fits them as if made for them. 
 
 Though it be forged but of a woman's dream ; 
 
 And stuff with such stol'n ends their manless breasts — 
 
 Sticks, rags, and mud — they seem mere puttocka' nests. 
 
 The puttock, says Mr. Acheson, is again an allusion to 
 Shakespeare's crest ; and he pronounces the lines before us 
 " a list of the well-known stock materials of Shakespeare's 
 plays." The Tears op Peace was published in 1609 : we 
 have but to think of the line of Shakespeare's plays from 
 Hamlet to Cobiolanus before dismissing the interpreta- 
 tion as a fantasy. The list is not even ostensibly a 
 characterization of current plays. It would better indicate 
 Markham's Sir Eichabd Grbnville, Greene's Qttip for 
 an Upstart Courtier, and Greene's Maiden's Dream, 
 than anything ever penned by Shakespeare ; but it probably 
 
118 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 refers to more recent pamphlets and poems by obscure 
 contemporaries. 
 
 Another confident inference of Mr. Acheson's seems 
 equally unwarranted. He has no doubt that the line 
 (II. i. 16): 
 
 Not utter'd by base sale of chapmen's tongues, 
 
 is a direct personal allusion to Chapman. Yet such an 
 allusion would have exceeded in wanton rudeness even the 
 large license of the Elizabethan stage, where the sparring 
 playwrights always attacked each other under pseudonyms. 
 Greene's " Shake-scene " was committed to a deathbed 
 tract ; and there is no instance of any dramatist aspersing 
 another by name on the stage. That Shakespeare had no 
 thought of a gross personal attack on his rival is sufficiently 
 proved by the fact that Chapman himself uses a similar 
 expression : 
 
 This beauty's fair is an enchantment made 
 By Nature's witchcraft, tempting men to buy, 
 
 With endless shows, what endlessly will fade, 
 Yet promise chapmen all eternity. 
 
 Ovid's Banquet, st. 52. 
 
 It might occur even to devotees that Shakespeare's own 
 name, with its challenge to punning, would make him 
 rather unlikely to turn a rival's name to libellous account 
 on the stage. 
 
 These miscarriages in Mr. Acheson's commentary, it is 
 to be feared, will be taken by some as a monition against 
 any attempt to find biographical matter in the play and 
 poems which we have been considering; and they do 
 not stand alone in Shakespeare literature. Mr. Acheson 
 accepts the common view that Spenser " very evidently " 
 refers to Shakespeare in the well-known allusion in Colin 
 Clout's Come Home Again to " Aetion," 
 
 Whose Muse, full of high thoughts' invention, 
 Poth like himself heroically sound, 
 
"LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST" 119 
 
 But that identification has often been weightily impugned ; 
 and the now complete abandonment of the older assumption 
 that Shakespeare must have been Spenser's "pleasant 
 Willy " ^ should warn its supporters against over-confidence. 
 The hypothesis that " Action " is Drayton, put by Todd, 
 Minto, and Fleay, and finally endorsed by Professor Elton, 
 has strong claims. Both the first name (Michael) and the 
 pen-name (Eowland) of Drayton "heroically sound"; and 
 his Heeoical Epistles are quite likely to have been current 
 in manuscript in 1.595, the year of issue of Colin Clout ^ ; 
 whereas nothing then published by Shakespeare answers to 
 the description. As for " Action," we can choose between 
 the " eaglet " interpretation and Fleay's ingenious thesis 
 that it stands for oitlov = cause, ground, reason, original, 
 and hence is the equivalent of Idea, the title of Drayton's 
 sonnet cycle. Professor Elton thinks this fanciful, though 
 Idea did have the force of "original" for Elizabethan 
 Platonists ; and the lexicographers actually note (as Fleay 
 did in his reprint of his thesis in his Manual) that Marcus 
 Antoninus uses alnov in the sense of "form" as against 
 matter, which clinches the argument. But even if we 
 decide that the word means eaglet, and that Spenser 
 immetrically made " .SJtion," a trisyllable, out of airog, 
 an eagle, which would give Aetion, Drayton, as Fleay 
 shows, will still fit ! For one of his sonnets, published 
 in 1594, is entitled " An Allusion to the Eaglets " ; 
 and it begins : 
 
 When like an eaglet I first found my love. 
 
 On the whole, then, we had better abandon the ornitho- 
 logical argument which identifies Shakespeare with 
 Chapman's " kestrel " and " windsuckcr." There is no 
 
 ' In all probability a reference to Lilly. 
 
 ■ It is evident' that the poem had been expanded between the writing 
 of the epistle dedicatory to Baleigh, dated 1591, and the publication 
 i» 1595, 
 
120 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 ground whatever for the inference; and, as it happens, 
 there is evidence of a prolonged theatrical relation between 
 the two poets which, once realized, excludes the possibility 
 of that extremity of ill-will which Mr. Acheson imputes 
 to both. 
 
PART III 
 "TIMON OF ATHENS 
 
PART III 
 "TIMON OF ATHENS" 
 
 § 1. CLUES TO CHAPMAN 
 
 It was noted by Professor Mackail that the verb "to 
 dialogue," found in the Complaint, occurs in Timon op 
 Athens (II. ii. 52). It is in a scene-section pronounced 
 by most critics to be non-Shakespearean that we find : 
 
 Dost dialogue with thy shadow? 
 
 This was for me the first clue to the discovery that the 
 non-Shakespearean hand in Timon, recognized by all 
 critics — or as some may prefer to put it, one of the non- 
 Shakespearean hands — is Chapman's. The very acceptance 
 of Minto's hypothesis had hitherto excluded the chance of 
 such a surmise. Erom Verplanck (1842) onwards, there 
 had been a series of guesses, he beginning with Heywood, 
 Fleay suggesting Tourneur, and Delius Wilkins ; while 
 Mr. K. Deighton, the "Arden" editor, thinks that only a 
 nameless player could be guilty of the worst of the " vamp- 
 ing." That Chapman could have had a "main hand" in 
 the play had apparently never occurred to any one. And 
 yet if we were simply to ask which of Shakespeare's con- 
 temporaries was most likely to plan a play on Timon, or to 
 write much of the admittedly non-Shakespearean matter in 
 our play, most students, I think, would have named 
 Chapman, with perhaps some hesitation in respect of 
 Jonson. Tourneur and Marston might be thought of for 
 a moment ; but Marston's turgid diction is never suggested 
 in the play ; and Fleay, by doubting Tourneur's authorship 
 of The Eevenger's Tragedy, has left his style a doubtful 
 
 quantity. But indeed the poorest parts of Timon are more 
 
 lis 
 
124 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 coherently written than any page of Tourneur. Chapman, 
 on the other hand, is full of Timonism. In all his 
 tragedies, from BussY D'Ambois to Chabot and C^sab 
 AND PoMPBT, there is an abundant infusion of world- 
 accusing rhetoric, even as there is in his poems, his prefaces, 
 his postscript to the Homeridian Hymns, and his dedica- 
 tions. A play on Timon would be as likely an exercise for 
 him as any he has undertaken ; and the management of the 
 action of the existing play at the very outset is like him. 
 In the first scene of BussY, where the hero strikes the 
 Timonic note, the steward who is sent by Monsieur to 
 Bussy with money supposes him to be "some poet" who 
 has given Monsieur " some pamphlet," in the fashion in 
 which the poet and painter approach Timon. 
 
 In the same scene there is even a duplication of an 
 image in the first scene of Bussy. Monsieur there speaks 
 of the sea, 
 
 That shats still as it opes, and lea/ves no tracts. 
 
 The poet in Timon has : 
 
 But flies an eagle flight, bold and forth on, 
 Leaving no tract behind. 
 
 And the word tract, which occurs only in the late 
 Henry VIII in the Shakespeare plays outside Timon, and 
 in Sonnet 7, is common in Chapman. 
 
 In the same scene, yet again, we have a set of purposely 
 strained metaphors, of which the last and most confused is 
 a manipulation of one uteed by Chapman in two signed 
 
 plays : 
 
 Our poesy is as a gum which oozes' 
 From whence 'tis nourished : the fire i' the flint 
 Shows not till it be struck; our gentle flame 
 Provokes itself, and like the current flies 
 Each bound it chafes. 
 
 ' A happy emendation, by Pope and Johnson, of " gowne whiol: 
 ute&J" Fleay's " glow " is a failure La comparison. He proceeds on the 
 " flowing of such fire " in Sonnet 73, 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 125 
 
 Compare : 
 
 Like a subtle river 
 That, seeming only to run on his course 
 Doth search yet as he runs, and still finds out 
 The easiest parts of entry on the shore, 
 Gliding so slyly by, as scarce it touched 
 Tet still eats something in it. 
 
 Byron's Conspiracy, III. i. 68-73. 
 
 We should imitate streams 
 That run below the valleys and do yield 
 To every molehill, every bank embrace 
 That checks their currents. 
 
 Byron's Tragedy, V. iv. 152-5. 
 
 In these plays something is finally made of the 
 
 metaphor : in TiMON nothing ; and the often debated 
 
 passage : 
 
 My free drift 
 Halts not particularly, but moves itself 
 In a wide sea of wax, 
 
 is best to be understood as one of Chapman's rather 
 frequent miscarriages of trope. 
 
 Half a dozen other verbal touches are equally like him. 
 Timon says that 
 
 The painting is almost the natural man ; 
 For since dishonour traffics with man's nature 
 He is but outside. 
 
 In Eugenia we have (Vig. 2) : 
 
 Am I this trunk '? It is my painted sheath. 
 
 As brave young men think they are what they wear. 
 
 Bussy says that 
 
 Brave barks and outward gloss 
 Attract Court loves, be in parts ne'er so gross ; 
 
 and the steward tells him : 
 
 By your no better outside, I would judge you 
 To be some poet. 
 
126 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 This last, as we have seen, is a common expression with 
 Chapman. Then the phrase (I. i. 47-8): 
 
 No levell'd malice 
 Infects one comma in the course I hold, 
 
 is a close parallel to the explosion in the Justification of 
 Perseus and Andbombda: 
 
 Kot being so much as touched, I witness God, nor one syllable 
 suffering. 
 
 As to syntax, we have his usual ellipses : 
 
 Your honourable letter he desires 
 To those [who] have shut him up. 
 
 'Tis not enough to help the feeble up, 
 But to support him after. 
 
 And the quotation by the poet of his own lines is a 
 proceeding frequently resorted to by Chapman in his 
 poems. 
 
 As we proceed, we find many more marks of his work. 
 The address of Cupid to Timon in I. ii., before the banquet, 
 notably recalls Ovid's Banquet op Sense, with its enumera- 
 tion of " the five best senses." But there are structural 
 details of more significance. The frequent transitions from 
 verse to prose, in single speeches, have been noted, by 
 Dr. Wright and others, as non-Shakespearean, and have 
 even been characterized as possibly only to an inferior 
 vamper. But such transitions are quite common in 
 Chapman. He employs them in his Introduction to the 
 Odyssey, and in the Widow's Tears there are a dozen. 
 Equally in his manner are the rhymes and the irregular 
 lines — of which, however, some are plainly corrupt, and 
 should be so noted. Most remarkable of all is the absolute 
 duplication of motive in Timon, III. v. and Bussy D'Ambois, 
 II. i. — the latter part of the scene. In both the theme is 
 
"TlMON OF ATHENS 127 
 
 the offence of killing in a duel.' In BussY, the King, 
 on the pleading of Monsieur, pardons the deed : in Timon, 
 the Senators refuse to pardon ; but the arguments are the 
 same; and the First Senator's line. 
 
 You undergo too strict a paradox, 
 
 echoes a line of The Eevenge op Btjssy (V. i. 192) : 
 
 These paradoxes strange and too precise." 
 The ill-scanned line (Timon, III. v. 53) : 
 
 Who cannot condemn rashness in cold blood ? 
 
 is like hundreds of Chapman's: in the phrase "prefer his 
 injuries to his heart " we have one of his common words; 
 as again in " suffering " : and in the opening scene the 
 vocabulary is peculiarly his. Particular, particularly, con- 
 jured, continuate, rapt, confluence, austere, drift, ivory, are 
 all much used by him, while " to climb his happiness " is 
 an equivalent construction to his common use of the verb 
 "to aspire," without an added " to." Compare the phrase 
 " Chanting his joys aspired " in All Fools, I. i. 6. 
 But especially noteworthy is the echo in the mock-banquet 
 scene (III. vi. 101), " Stuck and spangled with your 
 flatteries," from Sir Giles Goosbcap (V. ii. 290) : " And 
 now you plaster me with flatteries." If Shakespeare wrote 
 all this, he was copjring Chapman with a strange docility. 
 
 We are met at the outset by the critical consensus which, 
 after Fleay, assigns the first 185 lines of Timon wholly to 
 Shakespeare, admitting an alien hand only at line 186, 
 which is prose. But as this is only one of many issues (on 
 some of which the critics are greatly at variance), all set up 
 by the primary problem of discriminating the Shakespearean 
 from the non- Shakespearean matter, it will be well to state 
 
 ' This motive occurs yet again in May-Day, V. i. 254-5. 
 ' In Sir Giles Goosecofp we have i " What paradox dost thou defend 
 In this ? " (VI. ill. 78). 
 
128 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 at once the general case for the Chapman claim, in the hope 
 that when that is done the entire problem will admit of 
 restatement. None of the composite plays has been more 
 fully and ably discussed. Fleay gave the problem special 
 and keen attention ; and between the brilliant monograph 
 of Dr. Ernest Hunter Wright ' and the valuable edition of 
 the play by Mr. Deighton in the "Arden" series we have all 
 the aids to a judgment that have hitherto been possible. 
 But if once we recognize Chapman as possible part author 
 or originator of the play, students will see, I think, that the 
 task of discrimination takes on new aspects. Dr. Wright, 
 following Fleay, gives forcible reasons for reckoning Shake- 
 speare the originator ; some of the ostensible vamping being 
 an apparent confusion of his supposed work ; whereas 
 Shakespeare as reviser would presumably have ehminated 
 the poor and perverse matter which clogs the play. But if 
 we conceive Shakespeare to have imperfectly recast a faulty 
 play by Chapman, whether or not a third hand meddled 
 later, " the case is alter'd." 
 
 The first question is, the establishing of Chapman's 
 presence. If that be accepted, his priority is almost a 
 matter of course. That Shakespeare should have adapted 
 or collaborated in a play of Chapman's seems at first 
 unlikely enough, especially if we conceive him as possessed 
 by a bitter malice against the rival poet. But if we regard 
 him as having waged merely a humorous quarrel with his 
 testy rival, and remember that after all they had had a 
 common patron, there is no difficulty in conceiving that, 
 with or without the patron's intervention, Shakespeare's 
 company may have bought a play of Chapman's for 
 Shakespeare to adapt. Adaptation would certainly be 
 necessary, in Shakespeare's opinion, for any Chapman 
 tragedy. Were it not that the play is not strictly a tragedy, 
 we might suspect that if Timon had been begun by 
 
 ' The Authorship of Timon of Athens, in the series of Columbia' 
 University Studies in English : 1910. England : Clarendon Press. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 129 
 
 Chapman as it stands with conversational dialogue, it was 
 as a result of a hint from the management. Chapman's 
 way of beginning a tragedy is by a set of sonorous speeches. 
 But that Chapman, on the other hand, would ever be 
 called-in by the company to adapt to any great extent a 
 play that Shakespeare had finished is nearly inconceivable ; 
 and TiMON certainly shows Shakespeare's hand at the 
 close. What might happen would be an attempt to give 
 some added variety of action to a Chapman play which 
 Shakespeare had left somewhat deficient in action, as all 
 Chapman's tragedies tended to be. In this way we might 
 account for the heedless construction which has been so 
 troublesome to the critics. 
 
 It is not indeed inconceivable that this process had 
 been begun before Shakespeare's company acquired the 
 piece; and that Shakespeare simply never completed his 
 revision in detail; for there is no evidence that the play 
 was ever performed, though it was evidently meant to be. 
 Such a hypothesis seems rather more plausible than that 
 of Fleay, to the effect that, the manuscript having been 
 found imperfect, as is suggested by the confused pagina- 
 tion, the folio editors had called in somebody to piece it 
 out with the alien matter which we actually find. That 
 theory, indeed, appears to be now exploded.^ 
 
 If, on the other hand, we assent to the view of 
 Dr, Wright that lines 292-375 of Scene iii of Act IV 
 are an insertion, and that we should pass on from 
 line 291: 
 
 For here it sleeps and does no hired harm, 
 
 to 376: 
 
 I am sick of this false world, 
 
 we in effect assign the intervening matter to a later 
 
 hand ; for lines 376-93 are pretty certainly Shakespeare's. 
 
 But if we conceive Shakespeare as revising Chapman, 
 
 ' By Mr. Josiah Quincy Adams. Dr. Wright, as cited, p. 98. 
 
 9 
 
130 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 there is no difficulty in assigning to Chapman the matter 
 supposed to have been interpolated. In effect, lines 
 376-90 can be more easily understood as a purple patch by 
 Shakespeare on prior matter than can all the rest be 
 imagined to be cheap embroidery afterwards set around 
 his lines. The play as it stands is uncommonly short; 
 and it must either have been very short indeed, as 
 Dr. Wright admits, or have suffered much mangling, if 
 it lacked all the stretches of rapid dialogue which we 
 are invited to regard as post- Shakespearean. 
 
 It is like enough indeed that Shakespeare, revising, 
 grew tired ; and he may even have curtailed the scolding- 
 match between Timon and Apemantus ; for he now 
 makes Timon suddenly prepare us for his death and 
 burial, which are still a number of scenes off. Some 
 such touch of poetry was certainly wanted to keep our 
 sympathy for the greater misanthrope, who was beginning to 
 assimilate to Apemantus. But to say, as does Dr. Wright,' 
 that " no one would imagine " lines 291 and 376 " had 
 ever been separated," if they are read in context, is to 
 make a quite unwarranted claim. Dr. Wright has himself 
 called for surprise at the continued presence of Apemantus 
 after Timon's soliloquy-address to the gold, claiming that 
 " Only one inference is then possible. Shakespeare wrote 
 the soliloquy ; the other author must have written the 
 leave-taking which igrecedes it." ^ This is true in fact, but 
 we are not thereby entitled to say that Shakespeare's 
 work came first. The slanging-match was not a leave- 
 taking ; and if we leap from line 291 to 394 we 
 have still the " surprising " fact that Timon has solilo- 
 quized of his grave and epitaph in the presence of 
 Apemantus ; not having dismissed him. The surprise, 
 in short, is presumably Shakespeare's work, not the other 
 man's. 
 
 The rest of Dr. Wright's vigorous and ingenious 
 ■ P. 80. = P. 49. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 131 
 
 argument to prove the priority of Shakespeare seems to 
 me similarly inconclusive. What he really proves is only 
 that the other man had constructed his plot badly. But 
 on his own view Shakespeare had done the same thing. 
 The scene of the banishment of Alcibiades, he argues, 
 cannot be Shakespeare's, because it makes Alcibiades turn 
 against Athens on his own account, whereas the play makes 
 him finally profess to be avenging the wrongs of Timon. I 
 agree that the Senate scene is not Shakespeare's : the 
 thesis debated, the style, the verse, and the vocabulary, 
 are all Chapman's. I agree likewise that the banquet 
 scene (I. ii.) is not Shakespeare's : it is pure Chapman. 
 But on Dr. Wright's view Shakespeare had framed the 
 play without any explanation of the banishment of 
 Alcibiades ; and meant seriously to present him as going 
 to war because the Senate had refused to restore the 
 fortunes of a bankrupt lord who had simply thrown his 
 money out of the window. Shakespeare was not wont 
 to frame such action on such motives. 
 
 A more reasonable solution of the Alcibiades episode, 
 the confusion about Flavius, and the hiatus in the 
 action as regards Ventidius (who apparently was meant 
 to have played the ingrate like the other beneficiaries of 
 Timon, but does not reappear for the purpose), is simply 
 to say that the original draft was ill-constructed, and 
 probably not finally revised by its author. We can 
 almost see the play growing under his hands. Its funda- 
 mental weakness was that, as given in the sources, the 
 plot could not properly make a play at all. For 
 Chapman, that was never a deterrent. In curious con- 
 trast with the rapid action of his comedies is the slow 
 evolution of his tragedies. He has made two dramas 
 out of the treason of the Duke of Byron, by sheer 
 multiplication of rhetorical situations and speeches, the 
 first play ending without anything being done. An 
 entire Act, the fourth, is spent in recitals of past 
 
132 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 speeches, all irrelevant to the action.' Either of his own 
 accord or upon admonition, he sets himself to invent 
 episodes of action to eke out TiMON, which is rather a 
 grave comedy, ending with a natural death, than an 
 Ehzabethan tragedy proper ; and all the incoherences of 
 the play arise out of that effort. To doubt that he 
 could have so miscarried is not open to those whose 
 theory makes Shakespeare do no better. That he should 
 first make Alcibiades rebel in his own quarrel and then affect 
 to be the avenger of Timon is perfectly compatible with his 
 ordinary way of working. And, once we can conceive that 
 Shakespeare's company should take a play of his at all, there 
 is no difficulty in supposing that they took from him a play 
 which he had not properly finished, and which, finally, 
 Shakespeare did not reduce to unity. Shakespeare's 
 construction-work is far from being impeccable. 
 
 One reason for wondering whether the play ever reached 
 the stage is the standing confusion, not only as to the use 
 made of Ventidius but as to the sums (in talents) requested 
 of his false friends and of the Senate by Timon. In the 
 second section of the first scene, the debt of Ventidius 
 is reasonably named at five talents, the equivalent of 
 £1,200; and the dowry of Lucilius's daughter at three 
 talents. In the closing scene-section of Act II, again, 
 the messengers to the three lords are told to ask of each 
 fifty talents — a sufficiently stiff request, but one which 
 may be passed as representing the abundance of Timon's 
 former bounty and the largeness of his present need. It 
 represents his conviction that he had benefited the three 
 lords to the extent of more than £12,000 apiece. But when, 
 immediately afterwards, Timon directs Elavius to go to the 
 senators and 
 
 Bid 'em send o' the instant 
 A thousand talents to me, 
 
 ' This, it seems, was a result of the vetoing of the original Act by the 
 censor. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 133 
 
 it is difficult to believe that the writer knew what exactly 
 a talent was. The treasury of Queen Elizabeth would 
 not in such a case have required to make the halting 
 reply which Flavins says the Senate had given to his 
 previous appeal. The officials would simply have sent 
 the messenger to Bedlam. But in Scene ii of Act III 
 (13) we have the second stranger mentioning that one 
 of Timon's men " was with the Lord Lucullus to borrow 
 so many talents " ; and Lucius in turn (26) says : "I 
 should ne'er have denied his occasion so many talents." 
 Then, when Lucius is himself appealed to for " so many 
 talents " (1. 41) he answers : 
 
 I know his lordship is but merry with me : 
 He cannot wemt fifty five hundred talents. 
 
 One thing is quite clear : the writer of the " so many " 
 passages was in doubt as to the number he should 
 insert, and had either left blanks or put the two words 
 cited. Why? Again we are forced to surmise that he 
 was finally in doubt as to what a talent stood for; 
 which agrees with the impression set up by the " thousand 
 talents" of Act II. Now, this doubt could be partly 
 accounted for by the opening speech of Act II : 
 
 And late, five thousand : to Varro and to Isidore 
 He owes nine thousand ; besides my former sum, 
 Which makes it five and twenty. 
 
 The numbers here cannot possibly refer to talents : in 
 Act III Scene iv we gather that the units are crowns : but 
 this has not yet been indicated, and the writer of the 
 " thousand talents " message to the Senate might con- 
 ceivably have been confused by reading the senator's 
 figures with no unit specified. To ask for a loan of a 
 twenty-fifth part of one's debts would be a comparatively 
 moderate proceeding. 
 Putting the problem in terms of our hypothesis, we 
 
134 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 get this: that Chapman wrote the "five talents," "five 
 and twenty [thousand] " and " fifty talents" passages; that 
 the message to the senators demanding a thousand talents 
 is introduced "by Shakespeare ; and that the " so many " 
 passages are also his. Then for the " fifty five hundred 
 talents" we have a choice of two solutions. "So many" 
 having been just before asked for, the writer may have 
 tentatively put two numbers, one over the other; or, 
 finding "fifty," he may have written " five hundred " in 
 the margin, by way of accounting for the next line: 
 
 But in the mean time he wants less, my lord. 
 
 That the manuscript should have been left in this state 
 for actual performance seems very unlikely. It is con- 
 ceivable, indeed, that the printers finally got the main 
 manuscript, which may have been left unrevised, while the 
 actors' parts, separately written out, had been made 
 precise. On that view the other confusions of the play 
 may equally be regarded as the flaws of an unrevised draft, 
 finally used by the printers in the absence of a corrected 
 copy. But on any view we are left with the data of a first 
 writer who knew what a talent stood for, and a second 
 writer who was in doubt on the subject. And as the 
 "talent" never occurs elsewhere in Shakespeare's plays 
 save by way of metaphor — and seldom at that — we are so 
 far justified in counting Chapman the first writer and 
 Shakespeare the second. 
 
 The important thing, of course, is the demonstration of 
 Chapman's presence ; and the judicial method of Dr. Wright 
 actually leaves such a demonstration open. He notes, for 
 instance, that some of the items in Timon are derived from 
 the old "academic" comedy (circa 1600), and are not 
 found in Lucian's dialogue ; and to the argument that the 
 deep misanthropy of Timon comes from Lucian and not 
 from the comedy he replies ' that Shakespeare was sure 
 ■ Work cited, p. 21. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 135 
 
 to give Timon a deep misanthropy if he handled him 
 at all. As to the academic comedy he argues, fairly 
 enough, that Shakespeare may very well have heard of it 
 even if he had not seen it, and that nothing more is re- 
 quired to explain his introduction of the mock banquet and 
 the faithful steward. But, on the other hand. Chapman 
 was at least as likely as Shakespeare to have heard of — 
 still more to have seen — the academic comedy, and he was 
 certainly more likely to have known the Dialogue of Lucian, 
 to say nothing of the other sources for the Timen story. 
 In this way we account for the fairly clear traces of Lucian' s 
 phraseology which Mr. Deighton notes in the play ; and 
 when we find that these traces occur in passages far more 
 readily assignable to another hand than to Shakespeare, the 
 Chapman hypothesis is greatly strengthened. If, further, 
 we can show that the style in these places is really very like 
 Chapman's, it seems to become irresistible. 
 
 On the question of style, again. Dr. Wright scrupulously 
 avows that a quantity of the second-best verse in the play, 
 though it may pass as Shakespeare's, is not to be pro- 
 nounced unquestionably his. Quoting three speeches from 
 the opening dialogue (I. i. 63-83), beginning with the poet's 
 
 Sir, I have upon a high and pleasant hill 
 Feign'd Fortune to be thron'd, 
 
 he writes ' (italics mine) : 
 
 This is merely exposition. There is practically no emotion; no 
 incitement to a soaring flight of poetry. The passage is excellent ; it 
 reaches easily the plane of Shakespeare when he is not stirr'd to a great 
 moment of pathos or of passion. We do not need to say it is inevitably 
 Shakespearean. SJiould we find it in a play by Chapman, or by 
 Massinger or Beaumont, we should have no doubt that any of these 
 dramatists was equal to it ; we find it in a play printed as Shakespeare's 
 and we call it amply good enough for him. If there were nothing in the 
 play inferior to it, we should have no reason to think that Shakespeare 
 did not write the whole ; if the ivorlc suspected to be s-pit/rious in Timon 
 
 • Work cited, p. 25, 
 
136 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 had teen written by one of the other authors mentioned, we should find 
 his portions hard to separate upon esthetic evidence. But when we find 
 that in artistic merit the suspected portions, one and all, fall so far 
 below the passage we have quoted that their author cannot rival any 
 great Elizabethan poet, we shall have strong esthetic reason to consider 
 the passage quoted, and others like it in the play, Shakespeare's work. 
 
 Considering that Dr. Wright had no notion that any part 
 of the play might be assigned to Chapman,^ this very 
 judicial passage seems to me as important as it is remark- 
 able ; and I am well content to argue the case with the 
 italicized passages as common ground. First of all I will 
 take a speech from Timon which Dr. Wright, following 
 Eleay, confidently — and rightly — pronounces non-Shake- 
 spearean, namely, the twenty-one lines (30-50) of the 
 speech of Flavius in Scene i of Act IV after the parting 
 of the servants. Dr. Wright, like Fleay, takes them to be 
 an addition made to Shakespeare's work by the inferior 
 hand which followed him. But I would submit that the 
 lines in question are not so inferior "that their author 
 cannot rival any great Elizabethan poet." Even the 
 speech of the third servant, which has certainly been 
 touched by Shakespeare, suggests a Chapman basis, 
 inasmuch as "this sea of air" points to his four times 
 repeated phrase "flood of air" (Mask: Last Song; 11th 
 Iliad, 266 ; Hymn to Hermes : Poems, p. 2906 ; Georgics 
 of Hesiod : p. 226a). The soliloquy of Flavius is unrevised ; 
 but there are plenty of poorer speeches among the non- 
 Shakespearean dramatists ; certainly there are in Massinger. 
 The passage begins: 
 
 O, the fierce wretchedness that glory brings us I 
 Who would not wish to be from wealth exempt, 
 Since riches point to misery and contempt? 
 Who'd be so mock'd with glory ? or to live 
 But in a dream of friendship? 
 
 ' "We should be gratified," he writes (p. 101), "if we could put a 
 finger on a man who touched pens with Shakespeare in the play ; but it 
 is not likely we shall ever do so." 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 137 
 
 To have his pomp and all what state compounds [?] 
 But only painted, like his varnish'd friends ? 
 Poor honest lord, brought low by his own heart, 
 Undone by goodness 1 
 
 The very form of this deliverance will at once recall to 
 those familiar with Chapman a number of similar speeches 
 in his plays. For instance: 
 
 the most base fruits of a settled peace 1 
 
 In men I mean ; worse than their dirty fields 
 
 Which they manure much better than themselves . . . 
 
 Byron's Tragedy, IV. i. 1. 
 
 Oh, of what contraries consists a man I 
 Of what impossible mixtures 1 vice and virtue, 
 Corruption and etemnesse at one time, 
 And in one subject, let together loose I 
 
 O Virtue, thou art now far worse than Fortune. 
 
 Oh, all the world forsakes me I wretched world. 
 Consisting most of parts that fly each other ; 
 A firmness breeding all inconstancy; 
 A bond of aU disjunction. 
 
 Id. V. iii. 
 
 Id. ib. 
 
 Id. V. iv. 
 
 O strange carriage of their acts, by which 
 Men order theirs, and their devotions in them, 
 
 CcBiox and Pompey, IV. ii. 
 
 This exclamatory method is habitual with him, and it 
 is more often turned to the account of outcry against the 
 world than to any other. The soliloquy of Flavius, alike in 
 matter and manner, is Chapman all over. Certainly it is 
 not Shakespeare ; but it may quite well be second-rate 
 Chapman. And we must guard against false inferences 
 from a mangled text. The one irregular line (48) in the 
 latter part of the passage cited : 
 
 I'll follow and inquire him out, 
 
 is in all likelihood corrupt, and should be emended by 
 
138 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 reading "follow after"; as an earlier line (III. v. 57) is to 
 be emended by inserting " sometimes," which is needed 
 both for sense and for scansion : 
 
 To be in anger is impiety ; 
 
 But who is man that is not [sometimes] angry? 
 
 As a whole, the speech of Flavins is not mere vamper's 
 work, and it has several special marks of Chapman, notably 
 the use of " exempt," which is one of his tic-words : 
 
 Exempt of hope and fear. 
 
 Gentleman Usher, IV. i. 
 
 Enough t'assure all danger is exempt. 
 
 Id. V. line 8 from end. 
 
 To watch a time when all his wariest guards 
 Shall not exempt him. 
 
 Bevenge of Bussy, III. ii. 125. 
 
 Had our person been 
 Exempted from his malice. 
 
 Acbniral of France, V. iii. 142. 
 
 And he a swimmer so exempt from peer. 
 
 Trans, of Battle of Frogs and Mice. 
 
 Though most exempt from match of all earth's seeds. 
 
 Id. 
 
 From honour's court their servile feet exempt. 
 
 A Coronet for his Mistress Philosophy, Sonnet 10. 
 
 And make me live even from myself exempt. 
 
 To M. Harriots (with Achilles' Shield). 
 
 The most exempt in wealth, power, birth. 
 
 Epicediitm. 
 
 Puff'd contempt 
 Spurs to despair, from all fit food exempt. 
 
 Id. 
 
 Exempt from freres. 
 
 Id. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 139 
 
 A virgin exempted from comparison. 
 
 Argument to Andromeda Liberata. 
 
 Th' exempt Isle from the World. 
 
 Pro Vere, Autumni LachrymAe, 
 
 All which, from all resistance stand exempt. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to Earl of Somerset, with Hymns of Homer, 
 
 Swore . . . that all attempt 
 To do me ill is from your thoughts exempt. 
 
 10th Odyssey, 458. 
 
 Even where from rape their strengths are most exempt. 
 
 &th Odyssey, 192. 
 
 Where the divine rapture is most exempt from capacity in 
 grammarians merely. 
 
 CoTiim. on 1st Iliad, 
 
 Exempt from such base tongues as his. 
 
 2nd lUad, 241. 
 
 That bears a mind so most exempt. 
 
 10th lUad, 214. 
 
 Foaming and neighing, quite exempt from awe. 
 
 Horn. Hymn to Apollo. 
 
 A place pure and exempt from blood. 
 
 Bth lUad. 
 
 Clearly, once more, the passage is non-Shakespearean : 
 it " comes short of genuine passion." Pathos nearly always 
 eludes Chapman, as it did Marlowe, and indeed most of the 
 Elizabethans ; and only Shakespeare could have put the 
 touch of tears in the last speech of the play: 
 
 Yet rich conceit 
 Taught thee to make vast Neptune weep for aye 
 On thy low grave, on faults forgiven. 
 
 It is probably a condensation by Shakespeare of a longer 
 deliverance by Chapman ; for, if we accept Chapman as 
 planner of the play, we must suppose him to have worked-in 
 finally the epitaphs, both given him by the sources. It 
 
UO SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 is to Chapman that we must assign the third scene of 
 Act V, rejected by all the critics as absurd and super- 
 erogatory. It is bad art enough, but it is not really 
 supererogatory. Dr. Wright remarks on the absurdity of 
 making the soldier able to read in line 3, and unable to 
 to read in line 6. The older commentators did not 
 agree that in line 3 the soldier is reading ; but I hold 
 with Dr. Wright that he is. The natural solution is 
 that a notice himg up is in the vernacular, and that the 
 epitaph on the tomb is supposed to be in a " learned " 
 language. " Our Captain hath in every figure skill," says 
 the soldier. Even a vamper must be supposed to mean 
 something ; and if we read : " I cannot read't " in 
 Chapman's manner, we may understand. Even at the 
 finish, as it happens, we have the two epitaphs of the 
 records, Timon in the first couplet refusing to give his 
 name, and in the second giving it. That is not exactly 
 Shakespearean, and it is certainly a process of super- 
 erogation. But the final reading out of the epitaphs by 
 Alcibiades is fore-planned, and the taking of the inscrip- 
 tion in wax by the soldier is the simple device for the 
 purpose. 
 
 That Chapman drafted a speech for Alcibiades I infer 
 from such diction as " " Scorn'dst our brain's flow and 
 these our droplets," which is un-Shakespearean, and very 
 like the other man. The key of the speech is that of 
 the valediction to the slain Montsurry by his wife and 
 Clermont in The Eevengb of Bussy D'Ambois (V. v. 
 114): 
 
 CI. Noble and Christian 1 
 
 Ta. O, it breaks my heart! 
 
 CI. And should ; for all foMlts found in Mm before 
 
 These words, this end, makes full amends and more. 
 
 Best, worthy seal, and with it the dear spirit 
 
 Of my loved brother, rest in endless peace ; 
 
 Soft lie thy bones ; Heaven be your soul's abode. 
 
 And to your ashes be the earth no load. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 141 
 
 Shakespeare, I take it, has made the difference. 
 Chapman had not the secret of tears,' as he has not 
 the secret of the mighty Shakespearean rhythm : 
 
 Timon hath made his everlasting mansion 
 Upon the beached verge of the salt flood, 
 Who' once a day with his embossed froth 
 The turbulent surge shall cover. 
 
 By such greatness in the verse we can always be sure of 
 what is beyond Chapman in Timon. But when we have 
 recognized that the " fierce wretchedness " speech is his, 
 we come back to the opening scene to claim that what 
 admittedly could there be his is actually his. It may have 
 been slightly revised by Shakespeare as to the versification : 
 perhaps even a line or two here and there may be of his 
 adding ; but it is substantially Chapman's. The very first 
 lines quoted by Dr. Wright, with their characteristic inver- 
 sion, are to be assigned to him rather than to Shakespeare. 
 The whole dialogue breathes of Chapman; and the lines : 
 
 Amongst them all 
 Whose eyes are on his sovereign lady fix'd 
 One do I personate of Lord Timon's frame. 
 Whom Fortime with her ivory hamd wafts to her; 
 Whose present grace to present slaves and servants 
 Translates his rivals, 
 
 not only are thoroughly in his manner but embody another 
 of his tics. And first as to the " precious " use of " ivory," 
 which so weakens the effect of the image. This is character- 
 istically Chapmanesque. Mr. Deighton cites the "ivory 
 
 ' Though he has added to the Odyssey these notable lines : 
 
 In things 
 That move past utterance, tears ope all their springs ; 
 Nor are there in the powers that aU Ufe bears 
 More true interpreters of all than tears. 
 
 8th Odyssey, 720-4. 
 ' Who here = whom, = which, i.e. the grave. 
 
142 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 wall" from Lucrbce, 464; but Chapman uses the term 
 a score of times : 
 
 His ivory skin. 
 
 Kero and Leander, iii. 
 
 The ivory-wristed ' Queen. 
 
 Horn. Hymn to Apollo. 
 
 Whose arms had wrists as white as ivory.' 
 
 Short Hymn to Hermes. 
 
 Yet take yon in your ivory clutches 
 This noble duke and be his duchess. 
 
 Gentleman Usher, II. Bug's Song. 
 
 The ivory brawn of his right arm. 
 
 Eugenia, Vigil. Secimda. 
 
 Her ivory brows. 
 
 Revenge of Bussy, V. iii. 27. 
 
 Her ivory breasts. 
 
 Byron's Tragedy/, II. 24. 
 
 That concealed and expressive verse 
 That Justice in her ivory manual writ. 
 
 Tears of Peace. 
 
 Upon a world in her [Justice's] chaste lap did lie 
 A little ivory book. 
 
 Id. 
 
 Juno, deck'd with wrists of ivory.' 
 
 flow. Hymn to Hermes, 13. 
 
 The ivory-finger'd ' Queen. 
 
 1st Iliad, first version. 
 
 The ivory 3 skin. 
 
 4th lUad, 160. 
 
 Her ivory* body. 
 
 5th lUad, 338. 
 
 ' Where the original has " white-armed." 
 ' " White-armed" in original, as before. 
 
 3 The epithet is not in the original, though " ivory " occurs in the 
 descriptive image following. 
 ■• Not in the original. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 143 
 
 Nausioaa with the wrists of ivory.' 
 
 6th Odyssey, 141. 
 
 Ivory-arm'd ■ Nausicaa. 
 
 7th Odyssey, 19. 
 
 The ivory bounders of his tongue and taste." 
 
 10th Odyssey, 438. 
 
 Thy pale of ivory.= 
 
 1st Odyssey, 110. 
 
 In the last-cited instance, the poet notes that he thus 
 renders 'ipKog oSovrwv " for the better sound in our language." 
 Here we have a general use of the epithet "ivory" in 
 preference to " white " (though that is used at times), or 
 in sheer redundancy, as in the passage before us in Timon. 
 The ivory handoi Fortune, again, compares with the " white 
 left hand " of Justice in the Tears op Peace ; " her silvery 
 hand " in Bxron's Tragedy (II. 28) ; Panthea, " her white 
 hand to Bros giving" in the Mask op the Middle 
 Temple ; Achilles, " his fair hand far-thrusting out his 
 shield " (20th Biad, 237) ; the " fair hand " of Pallas in the 
 Sonnet to the Lady Arabella; and the line in May-Dat 
 (V. 187) : " Wafted me to her with her hand," which again 
 recalls the line : 
 
 Waft him aloof with hats and other favours, 
 
 in The Gentleman Usher (I. line 3 from end). The 
 "fair hand" image occurs in Chapman a score of times. 
 And the false stress of "to her," and the distorted phrase 
 about present grace translating 3 present rivals to slaves and 
 servants, are as like Chapman, who has hundreds of such 
 false stresses, as they are unlike Shakespeare. The 
 phrasing before us runs constantly to such conceits as 
 the last cited. "Eain sacrificial whisperings in his ear" 
 
 ' Original, "White-armed," as usual. 
 ' Original, " fence of the teeth.'' 
 
 3 Compare : " If Diana for your curiosity should translate you into a 
 monkey." — Widow's Tears, II. i. 31. 
 
lU SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 might pass for "Shakespearean" in respect of its Eliza- 
 bethan extravagance : but such a use of " sacrificial " is not 
 Shakespeare's.' Finally, in the verse part of the scene 
 there are sixteen imperfect lines in 190, and three alexan- 
 drines, which ought on Dr. Wright's own view to raise 
 critical doubts. 
 But it is time to handle the problem as a whole. 
 
 ' As it happens, he never elsewhere uses the word ; and I have not 
 fonnd it in Chapman either. It seems to have been new about that 
 period. 
 
§ 2. THE TEST OF VOCABULARY 
 
 Proceeding to examine the vocabulary of the play in 
 general, we find a notable number of words which occur 
 only in TiMON in the Shakespeare concordance, or only 
 there in the same sense, and of which a large number occur 
 more or less often in Chapman. With these may be 
 included a small number which occur rarely in the other 
 Shakespeare plays, and usually in late ones. Where such 
 recurrences are not noted in the following list, the words 
 are only once used: 
 
 1. Jeweller, I. i. 8. Occurs only in All's Well, V. iii. 297. 
 
 2. Untirahle, I. i. 11. "To an untirable and continuate 
 
 goodness." 
 
 3. Continuate. Last reference. This occurs only in 
 
 Othello, III. iv. 178, and there with a different 
 force : "in a more continuate [= freer or leisured] 
 time." 
 
 4. Presentment (= presentation), I. i. 27. This word 
 
 occurs only in Hamlet, III. iv. 54, and there in the 
 sense of picture. 
 
 5. Confluence, I. i. 42. 
 
 6. Beneath (adj.), I. i. 44. " This beneath world." 
 
 7. Particularly, I. i. 46. Found only in Coeiolanus, 
 
 IV. V. 72. 
 
 8. Windpipe, I. ii. 52. Occurs only in Hbnet V, III, 
 
 vi. 45. 
 
 9. Tract, I. i. 50. Occurs only in Sonnet vii and 
 
 Heney VIII, I. i. 40. 
 
 10 "5 
 
146 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 10. Properties (verb), I. i. 57 : " Subdues and properties to 
 
 his love and 'tendance." The verb occurs in King 
 John, V. ii. 79, 
 
 11. 'Tendance (last cit., also line 80). Found only in 
 
 Hbnet VIII and Cymbbline. 
 
 12. Glass-faced, I. i. 58. 
 
 13. Sphere, I. i. 66 : " This sphere " (= the earth). Sphere 
 
 is elsewhere used by Shakespeare only in the sense of 
 orbit or place. 
 
 14. Propagate,l.i.&l : " Propagate their states " = " advance 
 
 their fortunes." A use not found elsewhere in 
 Shakespeare, who gives the word only its normal 
 force. Compare All's Well, II. i. 20 ; Eomeo and 
 Juliet, I. i. 193 ; Pericles, II. ii. 73. 
 
 15. Personate, I. i. 69 : " One do I personate in Lord 
 
 Timon'B frame." (Also personating, V. i. 35.) 
 Occurs with a slightly different force in Cymbeline, 
 V. V. 454. But personated in Twelfth Night, II. 
 iii. 173, has the same force as in TiMON. 
 
 16. Scope (= aim), I. i. 72 : " 'Tis conceived to scope." 
 
 Shakespeare elsewhere seems always to use the word 
 in its modern sense of range. 
 
 17. Steepy, I. i. 75. Occurs in Sonnet 63. 
 
 18. Sacrificial, I. i. 81. 
 
 19. Period (verb), I. i. 99: "Which failing, periods his 
 
 comfort." 
 
 20. Uncleto, I. i. 168: " It would unclew me quite." 
 
 21. Unpeaceable, 1. i. 280. 
 
 22. Apperil, I. ii. 32 : " Let me stay at thine apperil, 
 
 Timon." 
 
 23. Dich, I. ii. 73 : " Much good dich thy good heart." 
 
 24. Sweep (noun), I. ii. 137 : " What a sweep of vanity 
 
 comes this way." 
 
 25. Deprave (verb = slander), I. ii. 145 : " Who hves 
 
 that's not depraved or depraves?" The indicative 
 occurs in Much Ado, V. i. 95 ; the participle in 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 147 
 
 Leak, II. iv. 139 — in the latter case with the 
 modern force. But depravation = slander occurs in 
 Troilus. 
 
 26. Jutting, I. ii. 236. Jutty (verb) occurs in Henry V, 
 
 III. i. 15, and as a substantive in Macbeth, I. vi. 6. 
 
 27. Able (adj.): "It foals me, straight, and able horses" 
 
 (II. i. 10). In Shakespeare the word occurs usually 
 in the constructions " to be able " and " able to." 
 Only in three other instances does he use it as here : 
 "able horse " in 1 Henry IV (probably a recast play) ; 
 "able man" and "able means" in Henry VIII, 
 and "able spirit" in Sonnet 85. 
 
 28. Ceased (= put off, silenced) : " Be not ceased with 
 
 slight denial" (II. i. 16). In the Shrew (Induction, 
 ii. 13) we have : " Heaven cease this idle humour 
 in your lordship"; and in Cymbeline, V. v. 255: 
 " Stuff which . . . would cease The present power 
 of life." Ceased occurs only twice in other plays, and 
 there with the normal intransitive force. There is, 
 however, a less marked transitive use in Lucbbce 
 (" cease thou thy course," 1. 1765) and in the Venus 
 ("ceased his . . . noise," 1. 919). 
 
 29. Reliances, II. i. 22. 
 
 30. Fracted, same line: " fracted dates." Used humo- 
 
 rously in Henry V, II. i. 130 : " His heart is fracted 
 and corroborate." 
 
 31. Dialogue (verb), II. i. 52. Noted above. 
 
 32. Detention, II. ii. 39. 
 
 33. Unaptness, II. ii. 140. 
 
 34. Auditor, II. ii. 163. As this is a required word, it is of 
 
 no evidential significance. It occurs, also as a 
 required word, in 1 Henry IV, II. i. 63. 
 
 35. Spilth, II. ii. 169. 
 
 36. Corporate, II. ii. 213. " They answer in a joint and 
 
 corporate voice." Used farcically in 2 Henry IV, 
 III. ii. 235. 
 
148 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 37. Fractions, II. ii. 220. " These hard fractions." Twice 
 
 in Teoilus. 
 
 38. Caked, II. ii. 225. " Their blood is caked." 
 
 39. Ingeniously (=mgeimonsly?), 11. ii. 230. "Ingeniously 
 
 I speak." 
 
 40. Bespectively (= respectfully or courteously), III. i. 7: 
 
 "You are very respectively welcome." Nowhere 
 else in Shakespeare ; though he has respective four 
 times in the ordinary Elizabethan sense of respectful 
 or considerate. 
 
 41. Ewer, III. i. 6. Occurs twice in Induction to the 
 
 Shbew. 
 
 42. Solidares, III. i. 46. 
 
 43. Becoverable, III. iv. 13. 
 
 44. Betentive (in a physical sense), III. iv. 82 : " Must my 
 
 house Be my retentive enemy, my gaol?" Occurs 
 with the same force in Julius C^sar, I. iii. 95. 
 Betention has corresponding force in Lbab, V. iii. 47. 
 
 45. Outsides, III. v. 33. The plural occurs nowhere else, 
 
 though the singular is common in Chapman, as in 
 Shakespeare. 
 
 46. Bepugnancy, III. v. 45. 
 
 47. Usuring, III. v. 10; also IV. iii. 516. 
 
 48. Humidity, IV. iii. 2. Occurs in the Mbbey Wives, 
 
 III. iii. 43. 
 
 49. Dividant (= divisible), IV. iii. 12. 
 
 50. Bother (= ox or cow), IV. iii. 12. 
 
 51. Oblique, IV. iii. 18. Occurs in Tboilus and Ceessida, 
 
 V. i. 60. 
 
 52. Fang (verb), IV. iii. 23 : "Destruction fang mankind." 
 63. Wappened, IV. iii. 38. 
 
 54. Embalms, IV. iii. 40. Occurs in Hbney VIII, IV. 
 
 ii. 170. 
 
 55. Spices (verb), IV. iii. 40. 
 
 66. Gouty, IV. iii. 46. Occurs in TEoilus, I. ii. 30, and in 
 the Complaint. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 149 
 
 57. Voiced, IV. iii. 81. 
 
 58. Penurious, IV. iii. 92. 
 
 59. Trenchant, IV. iii. 115. 
 
 60. Exhaust, IV. iii. 119. 
 
 61. Vestments, IV. iii. 125. Occurs in the Comedy of 
 
 Eeroes, II. i. 94. 
 
 62. Mountant, IV. iii. 135. 
 
 63. Oathable, IV. iii. 185. 
 
 64. Predominate, IV. iii. 142. Occurs in the Merey 
 
 Wives, II. ii. 294. 
 
 65. Turncoats, IV. iii. 148. Occurs in Much Ado, I. i. 125. 
 
 66. Hoar (verb), IV. iii. 155 : "Hoar the flamen." 
 
 67. Flamen, last cit. Occurs in Coeiolanus, II. i. 229. 
 
 68. Erection, IV. iii. 164. Used only literally in the other 
 
 plays. 
 
 69. Grave (verb = bury), IV. iii. 166. 
 
 70. Unmeasurahle, IV. iii. 178. 
 
 71. Ensear, IV. iii. 187. 
 
 72. Conceptious, IV. iii. 187. 
 
 78. Marbled (= made marble), IV. iii. 191. 
 
 74. Liquorish, IV. iii. 194. 
 
 75. Vnctvjous, IV. iii. 195. 
 
 76. Greases, IV. iii. 195. 
 
 77. Carper, IV. iii. 209. 
 
 78. Hvnge (verb), IV. iii. 211. 
 
 79. Approachers, IV. iii. 216. 
 
 80. Wreahful, IV. iii. 229. Occurs in Titus Andeonicus, 
 
 IV. iii. 239. 
 
 81. Castigate, IV. iii. 240. 
 
 82. Enforcedly, IV. iii. 241. 
 
 83. Swath, IV. iii. 262. Occurs in Teoilus, V. v. 25. 
 
 84. Confectionary, IV. iii. 260. 
 
 85. Bemotion {— removedness), IV. iii. 346 : " All thy safety 
 
 were remotion, and thy defence absence." Occurs 
 in Leae, II. iv. 115. 
 
 86. Mast (=; acorns), IV, iii. 422. 
 
150 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 87. Antidote, IV. iii. 435. Occurs in Macbeth, V. iii. 43. 
 
 88. Composture, IV. iii. 444. 
 
 89. Exceptless (= making no exception), IV. iii. 502. 
 
 90. Softness, V. i. 36. 
 
 91. Opulency, V. i. 38. 
 
 92. Patchery (= itoguery), V. i. 99. 
 
 93. Cauterizing, V. i. 136. 
 
 94. Becanter, V. i. 149. 
 
 95. Sorrow'd (= sorrowful or remorseful), V. i. 152 : " To 
 
 make their sorrow'd render." 
 
 96. Bender (noun), last cit. Occurs as a noun twice 
 
 in Cymbbline, and there only, save in Sonnet 
 125. 
 
 97. Approaches (noun, plural), V. i. 167. Occurs in Henry 
 
 V, II. iv. 9. 
 
 98. Contumelious, V. i. 177. Occurs only in 1 and 2 
 
 Henry VI, in non- Shakespearean passages. 
 
 99. Whittle (= knife), V. i. 177. 
 
 100. Fragile, V. i. 204. 
 
 101. Traversed, V. iv. 7: "Have wandered with our tra- 
 
 versed arms." 
 
 102. Pursy, V. iv. 12. Occurs in Hamlet, III. iv. 153. 
 
 103. Decimation, V. iv. 31. 
 
 104. Bluster, V. iv. 41 : " The bluster of thy wrath." 
 
 Occurs in the plural, in the Winter's Tale, III. 
 iii. 4. 
 
 105. Bampired (= having rampires or ramparts), V. iv. 47 : 
 
 " Our rampired gates." 
 
 106. Begular, V. iv. 61. 
 
 107. Insculpture, V. v. 67. 
 
 This list has been compiled without any exhaustive 
 scrutiny, and could doubtless be added to, especially in 
 respect of flexions of common words. But our list is 
 probably sufficient for our purpose. It is needless to stress 
 the point that seventy words peculiar to one play in the 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 151 
 
 Concordance, and thirty to one scene, constitute proof of an 
 alien presence ; for the composite character of the play is 
 universally admitted. On the other hand it does not follow 
 that every once-used word in the list is non-Shakespearean. 
 Some once-used words are to be looked for in every play, how- 
 ever homogeneous; and words commonly used by Shakespeare, 
 on the other hand, may be found in the alien parts of 
 composite plays. In such inquiries the vocabulary test 
 must always be checked by others ; and in the case of a 
 neologizing writer like Chapman, who uses so many words 
 once or twice only, we need not hope to parallel all the 
 vocabulary of any one piece. As to the Complaint, which 
 we have seen sufficient reason,.! think, for assigning to him, 
 we found in his signed work only a minority of the words 
 of Professor Mackail's first list — those never found outside 
 of the Complaint in the Shakespearean concordance. As 
 to TiMON we are in similar case. In the long and diversi- 
 fied third scene of Act IV we find some thirty such words ; 
 and of these I have noted only sixteen in Chapman. If as 
 many or more could be found in any other dramatist of the 
 period, we should have a prima facie case for surmising his 
 presence. But I can find no such dramatist : a few of the 
 words occur in Jonson, but not enough to set up a strong 
 surmise of his collaboration. Unless his hand can be shown 
 to be present, we are held down to the position, as regards 
 vocabulary, that either of the two writers in question may 
 have penned some or many of the once-used words ; and for 
 purposes of discrimination we must finally rely on the tests 
 of style, versification, imagery, purport, and syntax. We 
 are entitled to claim that Chapman, the supreme neologist, 
 could have coined all of the new once-used words here, as 
 he demonstrably did in the Complaint. On the other hand, 
 once-used words which can be traced to him occur in 
 speeches which are not of his versification. The legiti- 
 mate inference is that Shakespeare, recasting parts of 
 the play, turned into his own rhythm speeches drafted by 
 
152 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Chapman. For instance, all the critics rightly assign to 
 Shakespeare the speech of Timon (IV. iii. 176-96), 
 addressing the 
 
 Common mother, thou 
 Whose womb unmeasurable, and infinite breast, 
 Teems, and feeds all. 
 
 Yet in this speech we have the verb-form marbled, which 
 does occur in Chapman, but never elsewhere in Shake- 
 speare; and also unmeasurable, Uqtiorish, and unctuous, 
 which are in the same case. " Greases his pure mind " may 
 pretty confidently be assigned to Chapman also. Still, we 
 pronounce the speech a re-writing of Chapman by Shake- 
 speare : the verse is not Chapman's. It would not suffice 
 to say that the line 
 
 Whereon Hyperion's quickening fire doth shine 
 
 must be Shakespeare's because Shakespeare uses that 
 scansion in Hamlet and elsewhere, whereas the scholarly 
 Chapman correctly writes : 
 
 Great Hyperion's horned daughter drawn. . . . 
 
 Shadoiv of Night, st. 23. 
 
 Like other scholars of his time. Chapman varied in his 
 scansions ; and we have from him : 
 
 And bright Hyperion, that light all eyes shows. 
 
 Horn. Hyrrm to Apollo. 
 
 Hyperion's lovely powers ; from whence her name 
 
 Took sound of Python. 
 
 Id. 
 
 And as when bright Hyperion holds to us 
 His golden torch. 
 
 Trans, of Politian, in Pref. to Iliad. 
 
 In yet other instances he has this scansion, We must fall 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 153 
 
 back on the versification, which is so absolutely different, in 
 its continuous harmony, from the work of Chapman in this 
 play and elsewhere. But before attempting an all-round 
 assignment, it may be well to note what the evidence 
 from vocabulary amounts to. 
 
§ 3. CHAPMAN'S VOCABULARY COLLATED 
 
 Op the list given above I find the following in Chapman, 
 or suggested there. A number are tic-words of his : — 
 
 1. Jeweller. Poem on Jonson's Sejanus ; Bussy 
 D'Ambois, II. i. 120. 
 
 2. Continuate. 
 
 With a continuate tenour, full of art. 
 
 Horn, Hymn to Apollo : Poena, p. 283a. 
 
 To leave a sure pace on continuate earth. 
 
 Byron's Conspiracy, I. ii. 142. 
 
 Her handmaids joined in a continuate yell. 
 
 ith Odyssey, 962. 
 
 One continuate rock. 
 
 10th Odyssey, 119. 
 
 3. Presentment. Occurs as title in the Mask of the 
 Inner Temple ; Byron's Conspiracy, IV. i. 24 ; also in 
 the Epistle Dedicatory ; and in preamble to Sonnet 1 ; 
 and, in the plural, in The Gentleman Usher, II. i. Ill 
 (ed. Parrott), The Widow's Tears, II. iv. 61; and the 
 Dedication of the Georgics of Hesiod. 
 
 4. Confluence. 
 
 Fill a vail [= valley] 
 With such a confluence of streams. 
 
 4£fc Iliad, 480. 
 
 As a flood . . . that besides both hedge and bridge resigns 
 To bis rough confluence, far spread. 
 
 5th Iliad, 100. 
 Ki 
 
"TIMON OP ATHENS" 155 
 
 Th' inhabitantB in flocks and herds are wondrous confluent. 
 
 9th Iliad, 157. 
 
 ImpreBB'd with ceaseleis confluence. 
 
 Ovid's Banquet of Seme, at. 18. 
 
 Nor in the sixth day any influence falls 
 To fashion her begetting confluence. 
 
 Trans, of Heaiod's Booh of Dayi. 
 
 An entirely well-sorted and digested confluence of all. 
 
 Epiat. Ded. to Earl of Somerset. 
 
 Their joy is super-excellent 
 To see a court so confluent. 
 
 PhilUs and Flora, xov. 
 
 For all this confluent 
 Resounds my royalty. 
 
 Battle of Frogs and Mice, 24. 
 
 Neptune's confluence. 
 
 5th Odyssey, 70. 
 
 O father Jupiter, from thee descends the confluence 
 Of all man's ill. 
 
 19 th Iliad, 262. 
 
 Nor can with all the confluence break through his rooty sides. 
 
 17<7t lUad, 654. 
 
 5. Beneath as an adjective occurs in the 13th Odyssey, 
 213 ; and the phrase " this beneath world " chimes singularly 
 with a number of Chapman's : 
 
 Men of the under-globe. 
 
 19th Iliad, 2. 
 
 ye Gods, I see we have a soul 
 
 In th* under dwellings. 
 
 23rd Iliad, 94. 
 
 To settle their abode 
 
 With equals, flying nnder-strifes. 
 
 IQth lUad, 138. 
 
 These under regions, 
 
 11th Odyssey, 624, 
 
156 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 [Earth] who all the birth 
 Oives food that all her upper regions breed: 
 All that in her divine difEusions feed 
 In under continents. 
 
 Horn, Hymn to Ea/rth, 
 
 O Earth I broad heaven's inferior sphere. 
 
 Horn. Hymn to Apollo. 
 
 Pluto, God of under-gronuda. 
 
 15th lUad, 176. 
 
 The under-seated Deities. 
 
 Id. 208. 
 
 The under earth. 
 
 Horn. Hynrn to Hermes : Poems, p. 2906. 
 
 Compare : 
 
 Look'st ever upwards and liv'st still beneath. 
 
 Tears of Peace, 12. 
 
 That like earth's sons plough 
 All under-worlds, and ever downwards grow. 
 
 Invective against Ben Jonaon. 
 
 6. Particularly. Occurs twice in Mask of the Inner 
 Temple ; also in The Widow's Teaes, II. ii. 85 ; in the 
 dedication to All Fools, and in note 10 on trans, of 
 MusaBus, etc. 
 
 7. Windpipe. Occurs in BussT D'Ambois, III. ii. 238. 
 
 8. Tract. See above, p. 124. The word occurs often in 
 Chapman : Hymn to Heemes, twice ; Penitential 
 Psalms, i. 2; iv. 5; etc. 
 
 9. Tenda/nce = attendance. I have not noted this in 
 Chapman, but he has the contractions 'tend for attend ' 
 (Blind Beggar, line 2 from end) and 'tending for attending 
 (7th Odyssey, 414), as well as " attendance," which he uses 
 a dozen times in this sense. 
 
 ' This ^lap occurs in Shakespeare, Sonnets 53 and 57, 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS " 157 
 
 10. Sphere. " This sphere " in Txmon compares with : 
 
 I living and enjoying the light shot through this flowery sphere.' 
 
 lat lUad, 84. 
 
 All earth's grassy sphere. 
 
 1th Iliad, 370. 
 
 The sphere of earth. 
 
 GcBsar and Pompey, II. i. 41. 
 
 And see above, under Beneath. 
 
 11. Propagate. The peculiar use found in Timon is 
 frequent in Chapman : 
 
 Employ'd it 
 To propagate his empire. 
 
 Byron's Tragedy, IV. iii. 146. 
 
 That more their palates and their purses prize 
 Thau propagating Persean victories. 
 
 Andromeda Liberata : Apodosis. 
 
 Their eternity propagated by love of all virtue and integrity. 
 
 Ep. Ded. to Bacon, ■with trans, of Heaiod. 
 
 For I 
 WiU propagate mine own precedency. 
 
 Trans, of Horn. Hymn to Apollo, 
 
 To try, if we 
 
 Alone may propagate to victory 
 
 Our bold encounters of them all. 
 
 IGth Odyssey, 81. 
 
 Her most lawfully sought propagation, both of blood and blessing. 
 Pref. to Justification of Perseus and Andromeda. 
 
 Our plot . . . 
 For propagation of the Catholic cause. 
 
 Bevenge of Bussy D'Ambois, V. i. 60. 
 
 In Bybon's Tragbdt, I. ii. 3, we have the phrase " to 
 advance our states," with the exact meaning of " propagate 
 their states " in Timon. 
 
 • " This enflowr^d globe."— 8th Iliad, 2. 
 " The earth's glohe."— Byron's Tragedy, V. ii. 246. 
 
158 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 12. Personate. The use of the word in Timon is peculiar. 
 In Chapman I find it in the sense of our personify : 
 
 And why may not our Homer as well personate Sleep and Death, as 
 all men beside pertonate Love, Anger, Sloth, etc. 
 
 Com. on 16th IKad, end. 
 
 Again, he has the word with the meaning represent : 
 
 He that cannot personate the wise-man well amongst wizards, let him 
 learn to play the fool amongst dizards. 
 
 Mask of the Middle Temple : ed. Shepherd, p. 347a. 
 
 13. Scope. The use of this word in the common 
 EUzahethan sense of am or end (frequent in Spenser) 
 occurs often in Chapman: 
 
 For our ships know th' expressed minds of men 
 
 And will so most intentively retain 
 
 Their scopes appointed, that they never err. 
 
 8th Odyssey, 773. 
 
 My scope (= object, or aim) 
 To note then each man's spirit. 
 
 nth Odyssey, 708. 
 
 To the flood maintaining still the scope 
 
 Of his attraction. 
 
 2Ut IKad, 537. 
 
 He better skill'd, that rules worse horse, will all observance bend 
 
 Bight on the scope still of a race. 
 
 23ri IKad, 301. 
 
 All rankt, Achilles show'd 
 The race-scope. 
 
 Id. 655. 
 
 Is set next morn 
 In hill scope [=at the point] of his wisht return. 
 
 Arg. to 13th Odyssey, 1. 4. 
 
 The return of a man into his country is his [Homer's] iwhole scope 
 
 and object. 
 
 Ep. Ded. to tr. of Odyssey. 
 
 His blows directed to no certain scope. 
 
 Byron's Conspiracy, III. ii. 99. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 159 
 
 14. Unelew. This may perhaps be a misprint for unglew. 
 Chapman has glewed in the 18th Iliad, 540. But clew in 
 AiiL's "Well, I. iii. 188, connects with another Chapman 
 problem; and see "unwind" in the Two Gentlemen, 
 III. ii. 51. 
 
 15. Deprave = calumniate (a common Tudor use) is one 
 of Chapman's common words : 
 
 Herodotus is unjustly said to praise only the Athenians, that all 
 Grecians else he might the more freely deprave. 
 
 Pref. to justification of Perseus and Andromeda. 
 
 Depraving every exemplary merit. 
 
 Invective against Jonson. 
 
 A bold and glorious license to deprave. 
 
 Bussy D'Ambois, III. ii. 116. 
 
 He does not live. . . . 
 That will deprave your virtues. 
 
 Bth Odyssey, 334. 
 
 Doth deprave thy noblesse in mine ears. 
 
 6th lUad, 564. 
 
 Even such a man as Homer wanted not his malicious depravers. 
 
 Ep. Ded. to trans, of Achilles' SJdeld. 
 
 Homer ... an host of men against anyi depraver of any principle 
 be held. 
 
 Id. ib. 
 
 The worst depraving the better. 
 
 Ep. Ded. to trans, of Hesiod's Georgics, 
 
 Depraving justice. 
 
 Trans, of Heaiod, i. 
 
 Not scorning virtue, not depraving her. 
 
 A Qreai Man. 
 
 16. Abk. The phrase " able horses " in Timon is notice- 
 ably in Chapman's manner. A hie is one of his tic- words : 
 
 An able ploughman. 
 
 Note to Georgics of Heaiod. 
 
160 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 His able shoulders. 
 
 Horn. Hymn to Apollo. 
 
 Nothing inferior prove in force to him 
 But past him spring as far in able limb 
 As he past Saturn. 
 
 U, 
 
 From the last night's black depth I call'd up one 
 Of the inferior ablest ministers [i.e. fiends]. 
 
 Bussy D'Anibois, IV. ii. 78. 
 
 And cast out able flashes from mine eyes. 
 
 Byron's Conspiracy, II. i. 116. 
 
 And th' able cities, too, to strengthen it, 
 Of Macedon and Thessaly. 
 
 CeBsar and Pompey, II. iii. 17. 
 
 I slew in them twice fifteen hundred thousand, 
 All able soldiers. 
 
 Id. I. ii. 111. 
 
 I had able means. 
 And spent all. 
 
 Id. II. i. 11. 
 
 His best and ablest soldiers. 
 
 Id. II. iv. 24. 
 
 Able, nimble, perfect. 
 
 Id. IV. i. 24. 
 
 And you, the ablest fautor of her safety. 
 
 Id. II. iv. 109. 
 
 As many more instances can easily be given from the 
 translation of Homer: 
 
 In his silver hilt he held his able hand. 
 
 Ut lUad, 219. 
 
 Suppose me ablest of you all, 'tis hard for me alone 
 
 To ruin such a wall as this. 
 
 mh Iliad, 401. 
 
 With eaae stirred up the able troops. 
 
 l&th Iliad, 84. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 161 
 
 Twice five and twenty sail he brought, twice five and twenty strong 
 Of able men. 
 
 16th mad, 157. 
 
 Id. 713. 
 19th lUad, 393. 
 
 3rd Odyssey, 504. 
 
 lith Odyssey, 412. 
 
 Id. 134. 
 
 The Greeks past measure were 
 The abler soldiers. 
 
 This Xanthus spake, Ablest Achilles. . . . 
 
 And gave him horse 
 Ablest in strength and of the speediest course. 
 
 Thy able limbs. 
 
 An able young man. 
 
 To prosecute with ignominies one 
 
 That sways our ablest and most ancient throne. 
 
 18th Odyssey, 212. 
 
 Two men, 'gainst th' able faction of a throng. 
 
 16th Odyssey, 322. 
 
 17. Ceased. The transitive use of this verb (" Put a stop 
 to" as distinct from the meaning "cease from") is rather 
 frequent in Chapman, though he has the other also : 
 
 To cease their grudges. 
 
 Byron's Tragedy, V. i. 137. 
 
 Is it then your wills 
 That Fompey shall cease arms ? . . . 
 Shall Ciesar cease bis arms ? 
 
 Cceaar and Ponvpey, I, ii. 198-9. 
 
 Revered Minerva, break the lance of Diomed, cease his grace, 
 
 6th Iliad, 318. 
 
 If ever she had quieted his exclaim. 
 
 He would cease hers. 
 
 22n(2 lUad, 71. 
 
 And by the gods conamends 
 The holy hecatomb, to cease the plague he doth extend. 
 
 lat lUad, first version. 
 
 11 
 
162 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 The discords ... it for the time would cease. 
 
 Hero and Lcander, It. 162. 
 
 I believe that none 
 Of all the Greeks will cease th' ambition 
 Of such a match. 
 
 2nd OdA/tiey, 801. 
 
 18. Fracted. Not noted in Chapman ; but as he has 
 the forms : 
 
 Infract : lit Iliad, 419 ; 9th Iliad, 31 . 
 
 Prefract : " Prefraot and insolent." 
 
 Byron's Tragedy, IV. ii. 21 
 
 Befraet : " Things as well refract as Tolnntary." 
 
 Bevenge of Butay D'Amboit, IV. i. 147. 
 
 and fractions (see below), the word is likely enough to be 
 his. It is noteworthy that this and some other unusual 
 words in TiMON occur in Henry V. 
 
 19. Dialogue (verb). Has been seen to be Chapman's 
 word in the Complaint. 
 
 20. Detention. Occurs in 15th Odyssey, 90. 
 
 21. Unaptness. This I have not noted in his signed 
 work, but he has aptness (Bxbon's Conspibact, I. i. 96, ii. 
 line 6 from end, and elsewhere). The latter word, be 
 it remembered, occurs in the Complaint, 1. 306. In 
 Shakespeare it occurs only in iCoBiOLANUS and Cymbblinb. 
 
 22. Corporate. Chapman has incorporate (Widow's 
 Teabs, IV. ii. 132), also corporeal, incorporal, etc. 
 
 23. Fractions. Occurs in the Epistle Dedicatory to the 
 Earl Marshal with Achilles' Shield. Shepherd's rep. of 
 Homer, p. 11 : 
 
 "Who must not be read for a few lines with leaves turned over 
 capriciously in dismember'd fractions, but throughout." 
 
 24. Ingeniously = ingenuously ? By retaining the reading 
 in the text, the Cambridge editors indicate the belief that 
 the word was so written, though it cannot carry the current 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 163 
 
 sense. The fact is that the Elizabethans, and Chapman in 
 particular, used the two words ingenious and ingenuous with 
 no clear discrimination, both having at times, beside the 
 subsisting meanings, that of innate, or gifted, or even well- 
 born. The word before us points specially to Chapman, 
 who sometimes uses it with the apparent sense of 
 strikingly : — 
 
 The very beginning of his insultation . . . and the simply uttered 
 upbraids of the Trojans . . . confirming it most ingeniously. 
 
 Comm. to l%th Iliad, note 4. 
 
 In the same note we have an approximation to the modern 
 meaning : 
 
 See . . . how ingeniously Homer giveth him stUl some colour of 
 reason for his senselessness. 
 
 Elsewhere he uses it exactly as we do ingenuously : 
 
 But deals this man ingeniously, to tax 
 Men with a frailty that the gods inSict? 
 
 CcBsar and Pompey, I. ii. 258. 
 
 Professor Parrott here gives the reading ingenuously (as he 
 later amends ingenious into ingenuous), without making a 
 note on the passage. That Chapman wrote it as it stands 
 in Shepherd's edition is made probable by such uses of 
 ingenious as these : 
 
 For love is free, and his impulsions still 
 Spring from his own free and ingenious will. 
 
 Andromeda Liberaia. 
 
 Valiant and mild, and most imgemous. 
 
 Sonnet to Sir T. Howard, at the end of Iliad. 
 
 My own earnest and ingenious love of him [Homer]. 
 Much other most ingenious and utterly undeserved desert. 
 
 Pref. to Keader, with Iliads. 
 
164 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Again, in the Epistle Dedicatory of C^esab and Pompey 
 we have: 
 
 Ingeniously my gratitude oonfesaeth,' my lord, 
 
 where the spelHng is presumably Chapman's. In one of 
 his notes to Hesiod (B. i. I, 10 from end) we have: 
 
 He says one only son preserves his father's house, and adds most 
 ingeniously, ^ipjSc/icv, i.e. pascendo, seu nutriendo. . , . 
 
 In several of these cases the meaning is "inspiredly," 
 "with genius," "justly." Compare: 
 
 Flutns (or Biches) being by Aristophanes, Lucian, etc., presented 
 naturally blind, deformed, and dull-witted, is here, by his love of 
 honour, made see, made sightly, made ingenious, made liberal. 
 
 Argument of the Mask of Middle Temple. 
 
 For these ingenious and first sort of men 
 That do immediately from Jove retain 
 Their singing raptures, are by Jove as well 
 Inspired with choice of what their songs impel. 
 
 Ist Odyssey, 531. 
 
 Still the word in Timon might as well have been written 
 ingenuously. Compare : 
 
 And judge him by no more than what you know 
 Ingenuously, and by the right laid line 
 Of truth. 
 
 Admiral of France, I. i. 78 (a Chapman part). 
 
 For his various uses of ingenious and ingenuous see the 
 Poems, ed. Shepherd, pp. 151, 189, 200, 203, 227, 252, 282, 
 287, 289, 290, 293, 297, 300, 326, 327, etc. 
 
 25. Ewer. Occurs in Odtssby, i. 222, vii. 243, xv. 175 ; 
 and in Bteon's Conspiracy, V. ii. 182. 
 
 26. Becoverable. I have not noted this word in Chapman : 
 but he has unrecoverable in All Fools, I. i. 308, and in 
 Byeon's Tbagedy, IV. i. 112. 
 
 ' Compare : " Most ingeniously affirming," in the MasTc of the Middle 
 Temple. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 165 
 
 27. Retentive. Chapman has : 
 
 What words, said she, fly thy retentive powers? 
 
 19th Odysseij, 675. 
 
 I have within this isle been held for wind 
 A wondrous time, and can by no means find 
 An end to my retention. 
 
 'ith Odyssey, 625. 
 
 28. Outsides. This appears to be a once-used plural 
 made by Chapman, like outwards in the Complaint. In 
 that connection we noted his use of out-parts. 
 
 29. Usuring. Occurs in All Fools, V. i. 31 ; and in 
 Hero and Leandeb, vi. 266. Usiirous in Battle op the 
 Feogs and Mice : Poems, p. 2756. 
 
 30. Oblique. Occurs in Monsieur D'Olive, I. i. 122 ; 
 in The Shadow op Night, st. 22 ; and in pref. to Andro- 
 meda. Obliquely in Ep. Ded. to Odysseys. 
 
 31. Gouty. One of the words of the Complaint. Occurs 
 in the poem "To Young Imaginaries in Knowledge" 
 (Poems, p. 159a). 
 
 32. Embalms. Occurs in Ovid's Banquet, st. 32, 17th 
 Iliad, 616 ("Balm" (vb.), "balm'd," "balming" and 
 " balmings " elsewhere. 
 
 33. Spices (verb). Chapman has : 
 
 Will spice thy bread with flowery poisons. 
 
 10^7i Odyssey, 225. 
 
 Never spice it more 
 With forced terms of your love. 
 
 Revenge of Busey D'Amhois, III. ii. 233. 
 
 I fear me we shall find it spiced too hotly 
 With the old powder. 
 
 Byron's Tragedy, V. ii. 7. 
 
 Not by myself to be revoked, nor spiced with any guile. 
 
 First version of 1st Iliad. 
 
 Spiced-conscienced men. 
 
 Androineda : Foems, p. 1876. 
 
166 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 34. Penurious. Occurs in Monsieur D'Olive, I. near 
 end; but with the modern force. That found in Timon 
 (impecunious) occurs in Spenser (F.Q., V. v. 46). This 
 seems to be the normal Elizabethan use, and occurs in 
 Jonson. Chapman has penury with the corresponding force 
 (scarcity) in trans, of Horn. Hymn to Apollo, and with the 
 force of miserliness in the 15th Odyssey, 722. 
 
 35. Exhaust (= draw out). A common word in Chapman: 
 
 I am not yet resolv'd 
 T' exhaust this troubled spring of vanities 
 And nurse of perturbations, my poor life. 
 
 Sir Giles Gooaecap, I. iv. 2. 
 
 That with the high thirst of our soul's clear fire 
 Exhausts corporeal humour. 
 
 The Gentleman Usher, V. ii. 12. 
 
 When the wound was quite exhaust and crude. 
 
 nth Iliad, 230. 
 
 Her store 
 Is now from every house exhaust. 
 
 18th lUad, 257. 
 
 Food devour'd 
 Idly and rudely, wine exhaust, and pour'd 
 Through throats profane. 
 
 16th Odyssey, 146. 
 
 Her [the ship's] pump exhausted. 
 
 Georgics of Hesiod, ii. 
 
 All our seas being exhausted. 
 
 Trans, of 5th Satire of Juvenal : Shepherd, p. 265a, 
 
 36. Vestments. Occurs in Hymn to Chbist, 1. 36. 
 
 37. Mountant. Not in Chapman's signed work ; but the 
 preceding phrase, "hold up your aprons," occurs in Mat- 
 Dat, II. i. 3rd speech. Mountant, then, is presumably his. 
 It was a term in heraldry. Compare montant in the Meeby 
 Wives, II. iii. 27. 
 
 38. Flamen. In Cesar and Pompey (II. i. 101-2) we 
 have " arch-flamen " twice. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 167 
 
 39. Erection. Chapman has : 
 
 A spirit of my erection. 
 
 The Widow't Tears, I. iii. 12. 
 
 Erection in snch godlike excellence. 
 
 Hymnui in Noctem, st. 8. 
 
 iO. Grave (verb). Another old word, found in Chaucer. 
 Chapman has : 
 
 Lastly, they grave the dead. 
 
 Argument to 1th Iliad. 
 
 The throats of dogs shall grave 
 His manlesB limbs. 
 
 I5ih lUad, 317. 
 
 It is noteworthy that in the N.E.D. this last instance and 
 that in TiMON are given as jointly constituting a special 
 use of the word. 
 
 41. Unmeasurable. Occurs in Epist. Ded. to Achilles' 
 Shield, 1st sentence, and in 19th Iliad, xix. 54. Chapman 
 has unmeasur'd many times ; and unmeasurahly in The 
 Widow's Teabs, IV. i. 112. 
 
 42. Marbled. The verb occurs in Hymnus in Noctem, 
 § 20, last line : 
 
 And shameless day doth marble us in ill. 
 
 Chapman frequently applies the epithet " marble " to the 
 sea — e.g. : " Neptune's marble rampire," Pro Verb Autumni 
 LACHRTM.Si ; " Ocean's marble face," Achilles' Shield 
 "The marble seas," Andromeda Liberata (Poems, p. 1856) 
 "His [the sea's] marble saves Our State," Sonnet III 
 "The marble sea," 14th Iliad, 229. Compare with 
 " marbled mansion " as applied to the sky. 
 
 43. Liquorish. Occurs in various spellings several times 
 in Chapman : 
 
 These liquorish lips. 
 
 May-Day, IV. ii. 159. 
 
168 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 His liquorish ' chaps are walking by this time. 
 
 Monsieur D'OUue, V. i. 183. 
 
 Thy greedy liquorous appetite. 
 
 Trans, of 5th Sat. of Juvenal : Poems, p. 2666. 
 
 Your liquorous palate. 
 
 T/w Widow's Tear*, v. ii. 
 
 The licorous haste of these game-greedy hovmds. 
 
 Hymmus in Cynthiam, st. 11, last line. 
 
 Licorously occurs in Hebo and Leander, vi. 174. 
 
 44. Unctuous, Occurs in 21st Odyssey, 254. 
 
 45. Wreakful. Frequent in Ghapnaan : 1st Odyssey, 396 ; 
 Achilles' Shield, 1st version, 1. 3 from end ; Battle op 
 Feogs and Mice, p. 273 ; 3rd Odyssey, 263 ; 19th Odyssey, 
 669 ; 20tli Odyssey, 58 ; 11th Iliad, 133 ; 18th Iliad, 134 ; 
 Horn. Hymn to Venus, near end ; note on 20th Odyssey, 
 191, etc. 
 
 46. Castigate. 1 have not noted the verb, but Chapman 
 several times has castigation and castigations : All Fools, 
 I. i.; Comm. on 1st Iliad, twice; Comm. on 16th Iliad; 
 Epist. Ded. to the Earl Marshal with Achilles' Shield 
 (Shepherd, p. 13). Also castigatory : Pref. " To the 
 Understander " (p. 14). 
 
 47. Confectionary. Chapman has confect, 11th Iliad, 556, 
 and confection, Epist. Ded. to Ovid's Banquet. 
 
 48. Bemotion (=removedness, also removal). Chapman 
 has : 
 
 Set in absolute remotion. 
 
 HymnuB in Cynthiam, 
 
 To put them still 
 In motion and remotion. 
 
 CoBsar and Pompey, II. iv. 29. 
 
 All my tents 
 Took down for swift remotion to Scotussa 
 
 Id. III. ii. 41. 
 
 Spelt liquorice in Shepherd's ed. But the use is adjectival. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 169 
 
 49. Mast. Chapman has " Oak mast and beech " : 10th 
 Odyssey, 328. 
 
 50. Antidote. Occurs in 10th Odyssey, 404 ; Gentleman 
 Usher, V. ii. 60. 
 
 51. Softtiess. Frequent in Chapman : Hymnus in Cyn- 
 THiAM : Poems, p. 166 ; Ovid's Banquet, st. 104 ; Comm. 
 on 13th Iliad, 1. 556; Epist. Ded. to Achilles' Shield, 
 and elsewhere. I have noted ten instances. 
 
 52. Bender (noun). Chapman has rendry in 2l8t 
 Odyssey, 26. 
 
 53. Approaches (noun, plural). Frequent in Chapman : 
 Trans, of Musaeus (Poems, p. 97a) ; Epist. Ded. to 
 Justification of a Strange Action of Nero ; Tears 
 OP Peace (Poems, p. 123a) ; 20th Odyssey, 400. 
 
 54. Contumelious. Occurs in fourth line of Argument to 
 1st Iliad ; also in Hom. Hymn to Apollo (Poems, p. 2836) . 
 Contumeliously occurs in 1st Odyssey, 353. 
 
 55. Bluster. As before noted. Chapman has blusters, 
 blustering, and blustered; and in the Complaint he has 
 blusterer. 
 
 56. Traversed {" traversed arms "). This is usually 
 understood as meaning folded arms, implying dejection; 
 but the suggestion of Crosby that it means " with weapons 
 reversed" is more reasonable. "Carried across the body" 
 may be the idea. And this meaning is partly conveyed 
 by Chapman's lines: 
 
 Proportion still must Iraverge' her access 
 Betwixt his power and wiU, his sense and bou1.° 
 
 Tewrs of Peace : Shepherd, p. 1226. 
 
 In the Merry Wives (II. iii. 25) tra/oerse seems to mean 
 parry ; and in As You Like It (III. iv. 45) it suggests a 
 similar force. 
 
 57. Bampir'd. Occurs in 15th Iliad, 679 ; and 11th 
 
 ' Compare " traverse their force " in 12th Iliad, 149. 
 
170 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Odyssey, 257. The noun is found scores of times in 
 Chapman. 
 
 58. Regular is common in Chapman : 1st Odyssey, 360 ; 
 8th Odyssey, 225; 10th Odyssey, 252; Epist. Ded, to 
 Prince Henry ; Cesab and Pompey, IV. iii. 43 ; Eugenia : 
 Poems, p. 3396 ; Tears of Peace, p. 115&, etc. 
 
 It will be observed that a number of the words matched, 
 and equally a number of those not matched, are not 
 singly of much importance. They might have been used 
 or invented by either writer. But at least such words 
 as untirable, glass-faced, steepy, unpeaceahle, caked, 
 respectively, repugnancy,^ dividant, fang, wappened, 
 trenchant, turncoats, ensear, conceptions, carper, to hinge, 
 composture, exceptless, opulency, patchery, whittle, fragile, 
 decimation, insculpture, are all likely enough to have been 
 used by Chapman. It is very likely that he has used 
 some of them, and that I have overlooked them. He who 
 used the adjectives hospitious, dissentious, and treasurout 
 was likely to coin conceptions; patchery is much in his 
 way, as he has filcheries ; and heggery, drudgery, roguery 
 in one page ; and frequently thievery (a Timon word). 
 As he has often enforce, enforced (participle), and uses 
 enforcive, he is likely enough to have written enforcedly. 
 He who coined unpacified (18th Iliad, 299; 2nd Odyssey, 
 27) is likely to have written unpeaceahle. As a great 
 verb-maker he would find it natural enough to coin such 
 verbs as property and period : the latter word he uses as 
 a noun a score of times. It will be somewhat surprising, 
 indeed, if he used fragile and sacrificial in this play and 
 nowhere else. Fragile occurs five times in one passage 
 of six lines in 3acon {Nat. Hist, § 841). Sacrificial, 
 again, was a new word in the period, coming in from 
 the French. In Chapman I find only sacrificing, with 
 the force of sacrificial. But the scene in which the 
 
 ' This form was current ; and Chapman uses the forms impudeney, 
 inceiiancy, etc. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 171 
 
 latter word occurs in Timon is on a multitude of grounds 
 assignable to Chapman ; and such a neologist was likely 
 enough to have tried it.' 
 
 On the other hand, there seems to me to be special 
 evidential force in the use of words to which Chapman 
 sometimes or often gives a force not given to them by 
 Shakespeare — as presentment, propagate, scope, cease, in- 
 geniously, exhaust, grave (verb) ; and equally in the 
 occurrence of words special to him, as confluence, contu- 
 melious, wreakful, rampir'd, and the verb dialogue. Over 
 such words as spilth, of which the first recorded example 
 is in Timon, apperil, dich, solidares, oathable, and some 
 others, there must be doubt. Oathable suggests his 
 trustible (Sis Giles Goosecap, I. ii. 4). Apperil, which 
 occurs three times in Ben Jonson, is the strongest ground 
 I have seen for raising the question of his presence. But I 
 cannot trace his style, and unless that can be done we are 
 barred from the inference by the fact that he and Chapman 
 shared their vocabulary to a remarkable degree. They 
 must have followed each other's work habitually. In fine, 
 the number of words actually traced to Chapman seems 
 great enough to clinch the hypothesis that he had a main 
 hand in the play. To these might be added a number 
 common to him and Shakespeare, which are here used in a 
 way characteristic of Chapman, as hug, englutted, conjured, 
 rapt, austere, satiety, precedent, pomp, gratulate, importune, 
 preferred (= put forward, presented), stuck, spangled, suffer- 
 ance, excrement, fiction, heaps, etc. The line (V. i. 177) : 
 
 Contumelious, beastly, mad-brain'd war, 
 
 contains three adjectives all traceable to Chapman, one of 
 them not found outside Timon in the Shakespeare plays. 
 The phrase (III. vi. 101) " stuck and spangled with your 
 flatteries," again, savours particularly of Chapman, and is 
 
 ' A tendency to disparage French, seen in his discussions on Homer, 
 might make him desist from such words, after one use. 
 
172 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 duplicated in meaning, as we have seen, in one of his plays. 
 Add that the inversions, such as : 
 
 Drive back 
 Of Alcibiades the approaches wild, 
 and 
 
 I have upon a high and pleasant hill 
 Feign'd Fortune to be thron'd, 
 
 are distinctly Chapman-like, and the general case is broadly 
 indicated. If a dozen of the words which I have not traced 
 to Chapman should be found in his large body of work, the 
 evidence, I suppose, would be generally allowed to be nearly 
 irresistible, so far as vocabulary can carry us. 
 
§ 4. INFERENCES 
 
 To begin with, the evidence from vocabulary gives notable 
 support to that offered by style and phrase for Chapman's 
 authorship of the opening scene of Timon. And this 
 carries us a long way. Dr. Wright assigns the whole 
 scene to Shakespeare, outgoing Fleay and the critics who 
 follow him, all of whom make exceptions of a number of 
 lines. As Shakespeare undoubtedly worked over the fourth 
 and fifth Acts, he may well have worked over the others ; 
 but I confess I can see no very clear sign of him in the first, 
 though I do in the second. At most, the first suggests 
 retrenchment by him in revision, with a possibility of some 
 insertion of phrase. Dr. Wright, it will be remembered, 
 admitted that the opening scene of the play could con- 
 ceivably be written by Chapman or another : how then, in 
 the face of all the many marks of Chapman's hand, is it to 
 be denied him? 
 
 If we apply metrical tests, the presumption is over- 
 whelmingly against Shakespeare's authorship. In the 
 dating of the play in respect of its percentage of double- 
 endings, the customary oversight has been made of counting 
 it as a whole, in disregard of the marked differences 
 between parts. Just as the Comedy op Ebboes is counted 
 vdthout regard to the remarkable difference between the 
 first and second scenes, so the admittedly composite Timon 
 is counted continuously, and is reckoned a late Shakespeare 
 play because of its high total percentage of double-endings. 
 But if we take two of the longer speeches which are 
 admitted by all to be Shakespearean, those of Act IV, 
 
 173 
 
17i SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Scene i, and Scene iii, 176-96, we find low percentages — 
 10 per cent, in the first case, and 15 (three in twenty lines), 
 if we count " heaven," in the second. In the first 190 lines 
 of the opening scene, on the other hand, counting trebles 
 and further extras, we have some 57 double-endings, or 
 30 per cent. This fact, taken with the others, is surely 
 decisive. Chapman reached a high proportion of double- 
 endings long before Shakespeare did, and finally exceeded 
 him greatly. He was capable of a succession of nine, all 
 end-stopped. 
 
 If we look to the proportion found in the obviously 
 Shakespearean speeches, we are led to date the play earlier 
 than it has usually been placed. It seems to me to belong, 
 as regards the Shakespeare speeches, to the period of 
 Tegilxts, Hamlet, and Macbeth — perhaps rather before 
 than after these plays. But this is a secondary matter; 
 and two speeches form a quite insuf&cient basis for a 
 metrical estimate. 
 
 The essential point is that the high proportion of double- 
 endings in the opening scene is to be set down to Chapman. 
 Dr. Wright, I presume, will agree to assign to him the 
 scene of Alcibiades and the Senate, which he pronounces 
 non-Shakespearean,' and which is so entirely in a Chapman 
 strain. As he decides, further, that the "other writer" 
 enters at line 47 of Act II, Scene ii, he will perhaps agree 
 to assign that to Chapman on the primary clue of the 
 verb " to dialogue," above discussed. But a difficulty arises 
 for him in respect of the opening lines of II. ii. which 
 he seems to ignore in his description, dwelling on the 
 dunning matter as Shakespeare's, but saying nothing of 
 the opening speech of Flavins. Now, these lines are 
 hardly Shakespearean ; but they must be so assigned if 
 the dunning matter is. My own surmise is that Scene i 
 is Chapman matter revised by Shakespeare: the "able 
 horses " is a Chapman phrase, and the elision is like him. 
 
 ■ Professor Boas and Mr. Deighton dissent. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 175 
 
 But I cannot see that Scene ii is necessarily even a 
 revision : the earUer part as well as that condemned could 
 perfectly pass for Chapman's in a play assigned to him 
 and any collaborator. Eevision, doubtless, is resumed at 
 line 133 ; and we have seen reason to assign the " thousand 
 talents " to Shakespeare. But I find mixed work through 
 Act III down to Scene iv, which is wholly Chapman's 
 (Dr. Wright rejects it) ; as is Scene iv, and, I think, 
 Scene vi. 
 
 In Act IV, where we find Shakespeare's hand at the 
 outset, and frequently recurring, we find the " fierce 
 wretchedness " speech assigned to the " other writer," and 
 this seems clearly to be Chapman's. As for the third scene, 
 I am unable to resist the evidence of Chapman's drafting 
 that I find in style, diction, theme, and vocabulary. Had 
 the opening speech been found in a play ascribed to 
 Chapman and any of his avowed collaborators, it would be 
 assigned to him without hesitation. The versification has 
 his irregularity. 
 
 Rotten humidity : below thy sister's orb . . . 
 
 Scarce is dividant, toueh them with several fortunes ; 
 
 The greater scorns the lesser: not nature . . . 
 
 I am no idle votarist: roots, you clear heavens . . . 
 
 Wrong right, base noble, old young, coward valiant . . . 
 
 With senators on the bench : this is it. 
 
 And there are three fragmentary lines in thirty-three, so 
 that, on Dr. Wright's principles, the scene should be suspect. 
 Shakespeare may have touched it, however. The old word 
 " rother," meaning a horned beast, occurs nowhere in 
 Chapman's signed work; and though Shakespeare is little 
 given to the use of such vernacular words, as Dr. Henry 
 Bradley points out, whereas Chapman is, the fact that there 
 was a " rother market " at Stratford-on-Avon suggests that 
 the word here may be his. On the other hand, the passage 
 
176 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 composes ill with the context ; and the " who dares, who 
 dares," like the subsequent line: 
 
 Ha, you gods! "Why this? What this, you goda ? Why this? 
 
 does not suggest Shakespeare.' The noun semblable does 
 suggest him, as it occurs in Hamlet ; and I have not 
 observed it in Chapman ; but gouty, which is found only in 
 TiMON and Teoilus among the plays, occurs in .the 
 Complaint, and thus points to Chapman, who elsewhere 
 has both gouty and gout-wit-lamed — a literal and a 
 metaphorical use. Yet again, the line: 
 
 The senator shall bear contempt hereditary, 
 
 recalls one in Byron's Conspiracy, II. i. : 
 
 Which is in you more than hereditary. 
 
 The dialogue between Timon and Alcibiades does not 
 
 seem to me Shakespearean. Shakespeare's revision, I 
 
 think, is resumed at line 108; but " high-vic'd city " is very 
 
 like Chapman ; the " hanging " plague, as Steevens noted, 
 
 occurs in his sixth Iliad ; and the special use of " exhaust," 
 
 and his word " vestments," found only in this play, point to 
 
 a draft revised. It is agreed that lines 176-96 are in 
 
 Shakespeare's verse ; but there too, as we saw, the 
 
 vocabulary tells of Chapman. Shakespeare doubtless wrote 
 
 the lines: 
 
 Will these moss'd trees 
 That have outlived the eagle, page thy heels, 
 And skip where thou point'st out ? Will the cold brook 
 Candied with ice, caudle thy morning taste 
 To cure thy o'er night's surfeit; 
 
 but they hardly fit Apemantus, or cohere with the rest of 
 the dialogue ; and the next long speech of Apemantus 
 (239-48), like the snapping dialogue which precedes it, 
 
 ' Though he has similarly ejaculatory lines in As You Like It, 
 II. vii. 8D, and elsewhere. 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS ' 177 
 
 appears to be Chapman's. The prose dialogue, we have 
 seen, is rejected by Dr. Wright, and may be assigned 
 to Chapman, whose word "remotion" is found in it; and 
 in the scene with the banditti we seem, in my judgment, 
 to have Chapman matter, with only a verse revision by 
 Shakespeare. Dr. Wright, who finds the bulk of the 
 banditti scene " self -evidently Shakespeare's," does not 
 deal with the old item, noted by Farmer, that lines 438-45 
 are obviously borrowed from an ode of Eonsard, which 
 in turn is a rendering of one by Anacreon. If it be asked 
 whether Shakespeare or Chapman was the likelier to have 
 read that ode, there can be but one answer ; though 
 Shakespeare might have seen the old version by Southern. 
 In any case, the versification here is Shakespeare's ; and we 
 can but surmise a Chapman draft. Thereafter, Dr. Wright 
 rejects the speech of the steward (464-78) beginning : 
 
 O you gods I 
 Is yon despised and ruinous man my lord? 
 
 and this he will presumably agree to assign to Chapman, 
 who in a signed poem has the very collocation "ruinous 
 man" (Teaes of Peace: Invocatio), and very often 
 employs the term " ruinous." But when Dr. Wright 
 claims that the moment the steward speaks to Timon 
 " the style leaps into poetry," and that it lasts to line 508, 
 I am moved to demur. The verse remains very irregular, 
 and such lines as : 
 
 Ne'er did poor steward wear a truer grief 
 For his undone lord than mine eyes for you, 
 
 are not noticeably above the level of the preceding soliloquy. 
 Elsewhere Dr. Wright indicates the rhjmied work as in the 
 main non-Shakespearean. But this dialogue has these : 
 
 Pity's sleeping. 
 Strange times that weep with laughing, not with weeping 1 
 
 1'' 
 
178 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 which are hardly good enough for Shakespeare, and 
 happen to be very much in the way of Chapman. 
 Compare : 
 
 Perhaps I'll weep 
 Or so make a forced face and laugh again. 
 
 The Widoiv's Tears, V. iii. 103-4. 
 
 East in Torment's arms I sought, 
 All good talk'd but all ill thought, 
 Laugh'd at what deserved my weeping. 
 
 Penitential Psalma, i. 4. 
 
 When I find in the same passage the word " exceptless," 
 and the double epithet " perpetual-sober " applied to the 
 gods, I am still more moved to assign it to Chapman, 
 who made the word " expectless," and who has literally 
 hundreds of coupled epithets. In Timon's speech of 
 twelve lines, accepted by Dr. Wright, there are three short. 
 In the following lines, which he rejects, occurs this : 
 
 If not a UBuring kindness, and, as rich men deal gifts, 
 
 which may the more readily be assigned to Chapman 
 because it contains his word " usuring." But in the 
 previous dialogue we had the clauses : 
 
 Flav, An honest poor servant of yours. 
 Tim. Then I know thee not ; 
 
 which neither singly nor together make tolerable verse; 
 and in Timon's speech beginning at line 530, which 
 Dr. Wright assigns to Shakespeare, we have these : 
 
 Give to dogs 
 What thou deny'st to men : let prison swallow 'em, 
 Debts wither 'em to nothing ; be men like blasted woodi, 
 And ma/y diseases lick up their false bloods ! 
 And so fare well and thrive — 
 
 where the forcible-feeble verse jolts badly, and the " blasted 
 woods," "false bloods," and "thrive" are all very Chap- 
 
"TIMON OP ATHENS" 179 
 
 manesque. In all this dialogue I can see no reason for 
 picking out any portions as Shakespearean. Fleay rejected 
 everything from the end of the verse part of the banditti 
 scene, which he assigned to Shakespeare ; and the verse 
 there does indeed tell of revision. Dr. Wright, as we have 
 seen, gives snatches of the steward scene to the greater 
 poet, but solely on aesthetic grounds, which must be 
 pronounced arbitrary. Mr. Deighton is willing to assign 
 the whole steward scene to Shakespeare, though he 
 suspects it of being " garbled." If the student will re-read 
 the whole in the light of the hypothesis that Chapman 
 is the draftsman, I think that hypothesis will be found 
 to clear up the whole problem of the play. 
 
 Save in the speeches where Shakespeare's verse lifts 
 everything into a higher harmony, the manner seems to 
 me to be undoubtedly Chapman's. Such verse as this 
 aV. iii.) : 
 
 If thou didst put this sour-cold habit on 
 
 To castigate thy pride, 'twere well; but thou 
 
 Dost it enforcedly, thou'dst courtier be again 
 
 Wert thou not beggar. Willing misery 
 
 Outlives inoertain pomp, is crown'd before : 
 
 The one is filling still, never complete ; 
 
 The other, at high wish ; best state, contentless, 
 
 Hath a distracted and most wretched being, 
 
 Worse than the worst, content. 
 
 Thou should'st desire to die, being miserable — 
 
 were it found in a Chapman play, would seem fairly homo- 
 geneous with the rest, in respect alike of the versification 
 and the obscurity of the diction. When Dr. Wright 
 notes as marks of the non-Shakespearean hand in the play 
 the frequent reversion to rhyme and the habit of changing 
 from verse to prose, we are apprised of two outstanding 
 peculiarities of Chapman's work, the latter belonging 
 particularly to his comedies, the former to his tragedies. 
 And as both of these marks meet us in Act V of Timon, it 
 is difficult to see, ill view of the evidence from style and 
 
180 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 vocabulary, how the general draft of that Act can be denied 
 him. As soon as the verse begins, we have couplets, three 
 in fourteen lines; and of the remaining eight lines these 
 are five : 
 
 Nay, let's seek him. 
 
 True. 
 
 Come. 
 
 Than where swine feed. 
 
 Fit I meet them. 
 
 Upon Dr. Wright's principles, such work is not properly 
 assignable to Shakespeare. In the Poet's speech to Timon, 
 again, we have in ten lines these three: 
 
 Sir. . . . 
 
 What ! to you . . . 
 
 With any size of words . . . 
 
 and this : 
 
 To their whole being I I am rapt and cannot cover 
 
 — irregularities enough, apart from the broken syntax, to 
 discredit any speech if irregularities are to be taken as 
 marks of the "other" hand. Noting the "I am rapt" as 
 embodying one of Chapman's tic-words, we should have no 
 difi&culty in assigning the whole to him. And so throughout 
 the Act, with the reservations already made for Shake- 
 speare's occasional transfiguring intervention. It is in fact 
 the admittedly Shakespearean touches and speeches that 
 alone make Timon a memorable play. Ill-motived, ill- 
 plotted, ill-constructed, it is not such a drama as Shakespeare 
 could have schemed in his maturity. Considered as an 
 imperfect revision by him of one imperfectly drafted by 
 Chapman, to whom the theme would specially appeal, it 
 becomes newly and completely intelligible. 
 
 The main ground on which the hypothesis will be 
 resisted, I surmise, is its unexpectedness. No thought 
 of any degree of collaboration between Shakespeare and 
 
"TIMON OF ATHENS" 181 
 
 Chapman has ever, so far as I know, been suggested.' 
 But as there can be no 4. priori objection, the hypothesis, I 
 hope, will be considered on its merits. It so far clashes 
 with previous surmise as to show us Shakespeare in a 
 substantially friendly relation with one believed by many of 
 us to have been the " rival poet " of the Sonnets. But such 
 a relation would be Shakespearean enough. And as there 
 are a number of grounds for supposing yet further collabora- 
 tion or connection between the two dramatists, I propose 
 separately to indicate these, without imdertaking such a 
 fully detailed demonstration as I have offered in regard to 
 the Complaint and Timon. The clues, though noteworthy, 
 are in most cases of narrower application, and I indicate 
 them for what they are worth. It is desirable that the 
 whole problem should be investigated by others ; and 
 perhaps it will be found to be worth investigating. 
 
 ■ The essay of Friedrioh Bodensitedt on " Chapman in seinem 
 Verhaltniss zu Shakespeare " in the first volume of the Jahrhuch der 
 deutaehen Shakespea/re Oesellsehaft (1865) is simply a study of contrasts. 
 There is no suggestion of collaboration, and no recognition of any 
 Chapman element in Timon, 
 
PART IV 
 FURTHER PROBLEMS 
 
PART IV 
 FURTHER PROBLEMS 
 
 § 1. "PERICLES" 
 
 It will have been observed that, just as certain verbal clues 
 from the Complaint carried us to Timon, so a number of 
 clues in TiMON point tentatively to other plays, mostly 
 of the group commonly held to be of divided authorship. 
 But apart from Timon, the Complaint gives clues to one 
 play in particular, the admittedly composite Pebicles. 
 The first is the verb sistering, which occurs in one of the 
 Gower Prologues, generally admitted to be non- Shake- 
 spearean : 
 
 That even her art eisters the natural rosea. 
 
 Prol. to Act V. 7. 
 
 The next is the adjective sleided, found also in a Gower 
 Prologue, and that with the noun silk, as in the Complaint : 
 
 Be 't when she weaved the sleided silk. 
 
 Prol. to Act IV. 21. 
 
 As before, we make nothing of such coincidences unless we 
 
 find them supported by analogies of style, diction, and 
 
 theme. But such analogies we do find. The subsequent 
 
 lines : 
 
 Or when she would with sharp neeld wound 
 The cambric, which she made more sound 
 By hurting it, 
 
 recall those in the fourth sestiad of Hero and Leander, 
 in which Hero works with her needle on the scarf : 
 
 In her strength of thought 
 She fear'd she prick'd Leander as she wrought, 
 
 J8S 
 
186 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 and so forth. In these Prologues, too, we have just the 
 kind of verse which constitutes the " arguments " to the 
 sestiads of Hero and Leander and to the books of the Iliad 
 and the Odyssey. Prima facie, they could all be Chapman's, 
 with a special touch of archaism added to suit Gower. 
 Similar doggerel verse occurs in The Gentleman Usher 
 and several other plays. 
 
 But this does not take us beyond the Prologues. When 
 we turn to the problem of the authorship of the play, we 
 are met by Fleay's vigorously reasoned thesis that George 
 Wilkins, who published his prose story. The Painful 
 Adventdbes op Pericles, Prince of Tyre, in 1608, 
 " undoubtedly wrote the first two acts of the play " ; that 
 Shakespeare probably offended Wilkins by substituting the 
 Marina story, which is his share of the play, beginning in 
 Act III; and that a third author wrote the ^ue-measure 
 Gower parts and the brothel scenes in Acts IV, V, to 
 lengthen out the play to the legitimate five Acts.": This 
 substantially quadrates with the earlier thesis of Sidney 
 Walker, that there are three hands in the play.=i In 1874 
 Fleay held that the third author was " unquestionably 
 W. Rowley." But in his Biographical Chronicle (1891) 
 he says nothing of Rowley, and divides the play solely 
 between Wilkins and Shakespeare. That Shakespeare (save 
 for possible revision) enters at Act III ; that he handled the 
 story of Marina ; and that he had no part in the brothel 
 scenes, which do not connect with the rest of the story, may 
 be taken as common ground; with the reservation that 
 Shakespeare's work may be a rewriting and not an original 
 draft by him. But for the proposition — first put forward 
 by Delius — that Wilkins wrote the first two Acts, I have 
 never been able to see any evidence beyond the inference 
 drawn by Fleay from Wilkins's claim that the story 
 was "an infant of his brain." This doubtless counts for 
 
 ' Paper on Pericles in N.S.S. Transactions, 1874, Part I, p. 198, 
 ' Id., p. 200, note, and p. 253, 
 
"PERICLES" 187 
 
 something, and Wilkins may have had a first hand in 
 the play. 
 
 I do not propose to argue the question here, but will 
 simply indicate some grounds for a hypothesis that 
 Chapman may have either planned or recast the play as 
 well as written the Gower Prologues. 
 
 1. The mixing of rhyme with blank verse in the first and 
 second Acts. This is in Chapman's manner. 
 
 2. The occurrence of a number of his habitual words, 
 phrases, and ideas, as : 
 
 Few love to hear the sins they love to act. 
 
 I. i. 92. 
 
 [Compare : 
 
 Sin is aBhamed of sin. 
 
 Hero and Leander, iii. 328.] 
 
 Among the characteristic expressions are these : 
 
 All thy whole heap must die. 
 
 * I. i. 88. 
 
 And with the ostent of war will look go huge. 
 
 I. u. 25. 
 
 For flattery is the bellotot blows up sin. 
 
 I. ii. 89. 
 
 ["Heap" and "ostent" are too common in Chapman to 
 need exemplification. For the last-cited line compare : 
 
 Bellows to abhorrM lust. 
 
 22n<£ Odyssey, 584. 
 
 These bellows you wear on your head show with what matter your 
 
 brain is puffed up. 
 
 Maalc of the Middle Temple.] 
 
 Thou art no flatterer. 
 I thank thee for it . . . 
 Fit counsellor and servant for a prince, 
 Who by thy wisdom mak'st a prince thy servant. 
 
 I. ii, 60-4. 
 
188 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 [Compare : 
 
 That which intercepts that supreme skill 
 
 Which flattery is, is the supremest ill . . . 
 
 So flatterers . . . 
 
 Observe and soothe the wayward moods of kings ; 
 
 So kings, that flatterers love, had need to have 
 
 As nurse-like counsellors. 
 
 EpiceMv^m : Poems, p. 1686. 
 
 Whose present grace to present slaves and servants 
 
 Translates his rivals. 
 
 Timon, I. i. 71-2.] 
 
 To keep his bed of blackness unlaid ope. 
 
 I. ii. 89. 
 
 [Compare : 
 
 But wash and put un-tear-ita/ined garments on. 
 
 4th Odyssey, 1003. 
 
 Yet were his men unleft Without a chief. 
 
 2«d IKad, 622-3. 
 
 Undrown'd in misery. 
 
 24«/i. Odyssey, 87.] 
 
 But in our orbs will live so round and safe. 
 
 I, U. 122. 
 
 [Compare : 
 
 To make the flame of their delight 
 Bound as the moon at full. 
 
 Hero and Leander, v. 
 
 and Chapman's constant metaphorical use of " circular."] 
 
 For who digs hills because they do aspire. 
 
 I. iv. 5. 
 
 Like one another's glass to trim them by. 
 
 I. iv. 26. 
 
 The rapture of the sea. 
 
 II. i. 161. 
 
 From the dejected state wherein he is. 
 
 U. ii. 46, 
 
"PERICLES" 189 
 
 The words italicized are all common in Chapman ; and the 
 following passages contain what we have seen to be a 
 favourite formula with him : 
 
 Opinion's but a fool, that makes us scan 
 The outward habit by the inwwrA man. 
 
 II. u. 56-7. 
 
 That neither in our hearts nor outwcuri eyes 
 Envy the great nor do the low despise. 
 
 II. iii. 25-6. 
 
 Again, Pericles describes himself to the fishermen (II. i. 
 62-3) as 
 
 A man whom both the waters and the wind, 
 In that vast t&tvrdt-court, have made the ball 
 For them to play upon. 
 
 Compare : 
 
 So Ulysses' fleet 
 The winds hurl'd up and down; now Boreas 
 Tost it to Kotus, Notus gave it pass 
 To Eurus, Eurus Zephyr made pursue 
 The horrid tennis, 
 
 5th Odyssey, 427-31. 
 
 The tag about " drones that rob the bee of her honey " is 
 so common in Elizabethan drama that we cannot lay much 
 weight on its occurrence at II. i. 51, as well as in the 
 prologue to the Act ; but it should be noted that this tag 
 is frequent in Chapman. 
 
 There may be noted further six words which occur only 
 in Pericles in the Shakespeare plays, and which are found 
 more or less often in Chapman : 
 
 1. Litigious (III. iii. 3). Several times in Chapman : 
 
 Litigious clients. 
 
 Introduction to Odysseys, near end. 
 
 In his declined and litigious state. 
 
 Byron's Conspiracy, I, i, 98- 
 
190 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 The day when all litigious goods 
 Are justly sentenced by the people's voices. 
 
 Trans, of Hesiod's Book of Day>, 1. 8. 
 
 Litigious prose. 
 
 Preface to Eeader, Iliad, near end. 
 
 2. Cope (IV. vi. 132 : " The cheapest country under the 
 cope"). This noun never occurs elsewhere in the Shake- 
 speare plays, but it is common in Chapman in similar 
 phrases : 
 
 Ope, Earth, thy womb of gold, 
 Show, Heaven, thy cope of stars. 
 
 Song in Mask of Middle Temple, 
 
 All this cope beneath the sky. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to Prince Henry, 
 
 The cope of stars. 
 
 Trans, of Horn. Hymn to Earth, 
 
 The cope of light. 
 
 5th Odyssey, 375. 
 
 The cope of heaven. 
 
 \Uh Odyssey, 390. 
 
 The cope of stars. 
 
 20th Odyssey, 181. 
 
 Betwixt the cope of stars and earth. 
 
 5th Iliad, 773. 
 
 3. Seafarer (II. i. 41). Occurs twice in the 4th Odyssey, 
 496, 517. 
 
 4. Entranced (III. ii. 94). Occurs in 24th Iliad, 629, and 
 in Eugenia : Poems, p. 3286. 
 
 5. Benign (Gower Prol., II. 1. 3). Occurs at least seven 
 times in Chapman. 
 
 6. Chequins (IV. ii. 28). Occurs twice (ehequeens) in 
 Chapman, May-Day, II. i. 82, 323. 
 
 Add thiat shipwrack, which occurs twice in Peeicles (II. 
 i. 139, iii. 85), and elsewhere only in TiTus and Henby VI ; 
 artist (II. iii. 15), found elsewhere only in Teoilus and 
 
"PERICLES" 191 
 
 All's Well ; seaman, occurring twice in Pebicles (III. i. 
 8 ; IV. i. 54), and elsewhere only in King John and in the 
 Venus (454) ; relapse (III. ii. 110), found only in Henby V ; 
 and perpetually (I. i. 74), found only in the Sheew, All's 
 Well, and Lucbece (686), are all Chapman words. 
 
 I am content to leave the hypothesis at that, adding that 
 there are some clues to Chapman in the brothel scenes. 
 The prima facie theory is that Chapman either sketched or 
 recast the play, with its rambling tales, and that Shake- 
 speare wrought in or wrought over the Marina story, which 
 does not connect with the brothel scenes, rewriting Chapman 
 in part. It may be worth some student's while to work out 
 the problem, for or against the Chapman hypothesis. 
 
 It is worth noting in this connection, as was done 
 historically by Professor Ward, and long before, that Ben 
 Jonson in his second Ode to Himself on the failure of his 
 New Inn, 1629, writes with notable contempt of Pebicles : 
 
 No doubt some mouldy tale 
 
 Like Pericles, and stale 
 As the shrieve's crust, and nasty as his fish — 
 
 Scraps, out of every dish 
 Thrown forth, and raked into the common tub — 
 
 May keep up the Play-club. 
 
 There, sweepings do as well 
 
 As the best-ordered meal ; 
 For who the relish of these guests will fit 
 Needs set them but the alms-basket of wit. 
 
 This Ode clearly made a sensation, for it elicited four in 
 reply, three of them — by Randolph, Carew, and Cleveland 
 — sympathetic, and one, by Owen Feltham, acridly hostile, 
 though that too makes small account of Pebicles : 
 
 Jug, Pierce, Peck, Fly, and all 
 
 Your jests so nominal, 
 Are things so far beneath an able brain, 
 
 As they do throw a stain 
 Through all th' imlikely plot, and do displease 
 
 As deep as Pericles. 
 
192 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Now, Chapman's furious Invective against Mr. Ben 
 JoNSON had evidently the same occasion. The lines : 
 
 If thy petulant will 
 May fly-hlow all men with thy great swan's quill, 
 If it can write no plays, if thy plays fail, 
 All the earnests of our kingdom straight must vail 
 To thy wild fury, 
 
 point, like the other replies, to the Ode to Himself. 
 Chapman evidently felt a quite personal resentment : 
 
 Great, learned, witty Ben, be pleased to light 
 The world with that three-forked fire, nor fright 
 All us, thy sub-leam'd, with luciferous boast. . . . 
 
 No humanity 
 Of the divine soul shewing man in thee. 
 Being all of pilde composed and surguedry. 
 
 The Invective has been treated by Swinburne and 
 others as an unhappy explosion of old age, calling for no 
 further explanation. Yet an explanation is very much 
 wanted. Chapman and Jonson had been warm friends, 
 writing enthusiastic panegyrical verses to each other ; and 
 in 1618 Ben told Drummond that he loved Chapman. 
 After that, the Invective, on the face of the case, is a 
 mystery. But if we regard Chapman as having had, long 
 before, a share in Pericles, it becomes completely intelli- 
 gible; and no other explanation has offered itself. A 
 personal sting there evidently had been; and on our 
 hypothesis the fling at Pericles in the Ode to Himself 
 supplies it very sufficiently. Jonson, for his part, may have 
 known nothing of any connection of Chapman with the play ; 
 and no one else, so far as I am aware, has hitherto surmised 
 it. But on the other hand Jonson was likely to have known 
 of Shakespeare's connection with the piece ; and in his 
 exasperated mood may have cared nothing as to whom 
 he disparaged. If so, he partly earned the Invective. 
 
§2. "TROILUS AND CRESSIDA" 
 
 As Chapman's origination of Timon is worked out by pure 
 induction, we may reasonably try whether there are induc- 
 tive clues which would connect him with any other of 
 the commonly disputed plays. These are (apart from 
 Henry VIII and the " Apocrypha ") 1, 2, and 3 Henry VI, 
 Titus Andronicus, the Taming op the Shrew, 
 Richard III, and Troiltjs and Cressida. The last 
 may be taken first, as connecting naturally, in respect of 
 its classic theme, with Timon and Pericles. 
 
 It has long been held that TROiLtrs is a composite work. 
 Fleay^ once surmised an early play circa 1594, dealing 
 with the story of Troilus and Cressida alone ; but for this 
 there is no evidence beyond inference from the apparently 
 early character of some of the work, as I. i. 92-107 ; and 
 the prior lines 48-63 cannot be called early. An early play 
 is not unlikely ; and note should be taken of Professor 
 Herford's discussion ' of Greene's prose sketch of the Troilus 
 story, which suggests the possibility that he may have 
 handled it. But most of Shakespeare's work in the existing 
 play is evidently circa 1600 ; the two long scenes, I. iii. and 
 II. ii. having respectively the proportions of 16 and 21 
 per cent, of double-endings. Fleay's theory was that 
 Shakespeare first dramatized the story of Troilus and 
 Cressida on the basis of Chaucer's poem; that he then 
 added the story of Hector and Ajax, with the slaying of 
 
 ' Shakespeare Manual, ch. ix. 
 
 " Paper on " Greene's Romances and Shakespeare," in N.S.S. Trans- 
 actioQg, 1888. 
 
 13 "3 
 
194 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Hector by Achilles, on the basis of Caxton's Three 
 Destuctions of Teoy ; and that finally, after the publica- 
 tion of Chapman's Iliad (seven books, in 1598) he added 
 the story of Ulysses' stratagem to sting Achilles to action 
 by the magnifying of Ajax, Thersites also being now intro- 
 duced for the first time. In support of the thesis it is 
 claimed that nowhere does the story of Troilus and 
 Cressida overlap with the others, save in V. ii., where 
 Ulysses enters; and in IV. v. 277-93; V. i. 89-93; V. iv. 
 10-24 ; V. V. 1-5 ; and V. vi. 1-11, in which also Ulysses 
 is involved. 
 
 The first difficulty is that, while describing the love-story, 
 dated 1594, as a planned pendant or contrast to that of 
 faithful Juliet, Fleay paralleled the style from the Mer- 
 chant OP Venice, which in the Manual he dates 1596, 
 with Eomeo and Juliet; but afterwards, in his Life of 
 Shakespeare, dates 1597 ; returning to 1596 in his 
 Biogeaphical Cheoniclb. 
 
 But a greater difficulty is raised by the questions (1) 
 whether the supposed early sketch of Teoilus and 
 Ceessida was ever produced as a play at all ; and (2) 
 whether with the addition of the Hector- Ajax- Achilles 
 story it was again played. Fleay points out that "the 
 Troilus story ends at Act V. Scene iii. ; the Hector story 
 at the end of the present play ; while the final additions as 
 to Ajax, Ulysses, etc., are all inserted in the previously 
 existing parts, and do not reach to the end, either as we 
 have it now or as it existed in either of the two earlier 
 stages. Now Shakespeare would not in all probability 
 write even so incomplete a sketch as the Troilus story 
 without contriving an end for it and writing this end." 
 And he claims that the Folio lines (not preserved in the 
 ordinary editions) at the close of V. iii. : 
 
 Pan. Why, but hear you? 
 
 Troy. Hence, brother lackey, ignomy and shame 
 Pursue thy life and live aye with thy name 
 
"TROILUS AND CRESSIDA" 195 
 
 "are evidently meant for the final end of the play, as they 
 occur again just before Pandarus's final epilogue." This 
 seems to require that the epilogue also was part of the 
 original conclusion ; but Fleay is doubtful of its authenticity, 
 presumably because of the un- Shakespearean quality which 
 it shares with Scenes vi to ix. And yet, without it, the 
 play would have ended very abruptly indeed — so abruptly, 
 that it is difficult to conceive of its being so planned. The 
 further application of verse-tests, which shows a ratio of 
 1 rhyme-line to 8'4 in the Troilus story, to 13'6 in the 
 Hector story, and 1 to 54'5 in the Ajax-Ulysses story, is 
 claimed to confirm the theory of the three periods. But in 
 this argument the rhyme-test is credited with a conclusive- 
 ness which it does not really possess, the assumption being 
 involved that Love's Labour's Lost is necessarily an earlier 
 play than the Two Gentlemen, whereas its literary quality 
 tells the other way. And if we point the counter-hjrpothesis 
 that the different parts of the story are merely the work, 
 originally, of different hands, the rhyme-test will equally 
 square with that theory. 
 
 In the absence of any proof that Shakespeare produced 
 any play on Tboilus and Cressida before 1599 (Meres had 
 no mention of any in 1598) , we naturally turn to the datum 
 supplied by Henslowe's Diary, that a play of this title was 
 written by Dekker and Chettle in 1599. Fleay himself 
 suggests I that the spurious part of Act V of our play "is 
 probably debris from Dekker and Chettle's Troyltjs and 
 Cressida, written in 1592, and reproduced in a revised form 
 as Agamemnon in 1599." But there is no evidence whatever 
 for the 1592 date, and no probability in it ; and in his Bio- 
 graphical Chronicle Fleay does not repeat this suggestion. 
 Henslowe's entry tells of a play of Trotlus and Cressida 
 and a tragedy of AGAMEMNONlas both on hand in May 1599 ; 
 but the latter play goes forward and the other does not. 
 It has accordingly been assumed, both before and after 
 ' Manual, p. 325, note. 
 
196 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Fleay, that there was only one play, and that what was 
 begun as Trotlds and Cbessida was produced as 
 Agamemnon. It seems rather more likely that the first 
 play was otherwise disposed of, and that the Agamemnon 
 was a distinct tragedy dealing with the death of that 
 personage. The original Troilus theme was, in point of 
 fact, finally unmanageable by itself for dramatic purposes, 
 and what has actually happened is a combination of the 
 Troilus story with a quantity of other matter. 
 
 On that view we are led to ask whether the play we 
 possess was not primarily the work of Dekker and Chettle, 
 which may or may not have proceeded on earlier work. 
 That this hypothesis has not been considered appears to be 
 due to the fact that in Histriomastix there is a reference 
 to this play which is held to identify it in its first form 
 with Shakespeare. 
 
 Troy. Come Cressida, my cresset light 
 
 Thy face doth shine, both day and night. 
 Behold, behold thy garter blue 
 Thy knight his valiant elbow wears, 
 That when he shakes his furious speare 
 The foe, in shivering fearful sort, 
 May lay him down in death to snort. 
 
 Cree. knight, with valour in thy face 
 
 Here take my skreene, wear it for grace ; 
 Within thy helmet put the same 
 Therewith to make thy enemies lame. 
 
 It is commonly held, with Fleay, that this surely refers to 
 the changing of sleeve and glove in the play, in direct 
 connection with Shakespeare's name.': rpj^g matter is of 
 no great importance, since Histriomastix is commonly 
 dated 1599, and Shakespeare's work in Troilus may be 
 dated, as to style, about that time. But I would point out 
 that the oft-quoted " shahe-speare'\lme does not neces- 
 
 ' Manual, p. 50. The suggestion was made long before Fleay, by the 
 eighteenth-century commentators. 
 
"TROILUS AND CRESSIDA" 197 
 
 sarily refer to Shakespeare at all. In his later Biogbaphical 
 Chronicle (II. 22) Fleay modifies his early inference and 
 writes that the allusion " cannot, unfortunately, be fully 
 explained, as the Dekker play is not extant ; but it prob- 
 ably refers to something therein anent Shakespeare's drama 
 on the subject in its earlier form." If the line ever had any 
 reference to Shakespeare's name it was an inane allusion ; 
 and Landulpho in the next line is made to call the doggerel 
 " lame stuff indeed, the like was never heard." But there 
 was probably no name-allusion. The phrase " shake . . . 
 speare " is one of the common alliterations of the period. 
 For instances : 
 
 And clash their shields and shake their swords on high. 
 
 Spenser, Faerie Queeiie, I. iv. 40. 
 
 And shivering spear in bloody field first shook. 
 
 Id. III. i. 7. 
 
 With that they 'gan their shivering spears to shake. 
 
 Id. IV. u. 14. 
 
 He all enraged his shivering spear did shake. 
 
 Id. IV. iii. 10. 
 
 Other alliterations show that the collocation of " spear " 
 and "shake" was fortuitous: 
 
 Then, hurling up his harmful blade on high, 
 Smote him so hugely on his haughty crest. 
 
 Id. II. viii. 33. 
 
 With that the darts that his right hand did strain 
 Full dreadfully he shook. 
 
 Id. III. xii. 23. 
 
 His harmful club began to hurtle high. 
 
 Id. II. vii. 42. 
 
 The dramatists were doing the same thing long before 1599 : 
 
 Our quivering lances shaking in the air. 
 
 Marlowe, 1 Tamh. II. ui. 18. 
 
198 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 With shivering spears enforcing thunderolnpp. 
 
 Id. ih. III. ii. 
 
 Shaking their swords, their spears, and iron bills. 
 
 Id. IV. i. 25 
 
 All brandishing their brands of quenchless fire. 
 
 Id. 2 Tamh. III. v. 7. 
 
 And break their burning lances in the air. 
 
 Id. ih, IV. ii. line 3 from end. 
 
 That shakes his sword against thy majesty. 
 
 Id. ib. V. i. 
 
 To toBB the spear in battelous array. 
 
 SeUmut, 1, 158. 
 
 The shivers fly of many a shaken tpear, 
 
 Peele, Polyhymnia (1590), 11th couple. 
 
 With shield and shivering lance. 
 
 Id. Order of the Garter (1593), 1. 40. 
 
 And make their spears to shiver in the air. 
 
 Greene, Alphonsus King of Arragon (1588 ?), V. i. 
 
 Shake thy spears in honour of his name. 
 
 Peele, Edward I (printed 1593), Sc. iii. (or II. i.). 
 
 Of Fairfax's translation of Tasso's Jerusalem, published 
 in 1600, the bulk must have been written before that year ; 
 and there we find the " shake " tag many times : 
 
 That durst not shake the spear, nor target hold. 
 
 B. III. St. 11. 
 
 Mast-great the spear was that the gallant bore. 
 That in his warlike pride he made to shake. 
 
 Id. III. 17. 
 
 And shak'd for rage their swords and weapons keen. 
 
 Id. VI. 20. 
 
 Tliese hands were made to shake sharp spears, and swords. 
 
 Id. V. 42. 
 
"TROILUS AND CRESSIDA" 199 
 
 Above his head he shook his naked blade. 
 
 Id. VII. 53. 
 
 Their hands shook swords. 
 
 Id. XX. 29. 
 
 The fair inference seems to be that " shake . . . spear " 
 was too common a tag to carry any personal reference 
 whatever. What is suggested by the allusion in Histeio- 
 MASTix is that the play of Dekker and Chettle, perhaps in 
 respect of some old matter which it worked up, was partly 
 in doggerel, as there seems to be otherwise no point in 
 the passage. As there is much " Skeltonical " and other 
 doggerel in the two plays of Munday and Chettle on Eobert 
 Earl of Huntington, written about the same time, this is 
 likely enough. For the rest, if the poverty of the last Act 
 of our play justifies the surmise that the work of Dekker 
 and Chettle is embodied in it, we seem compelled to 
 suppose also that their play had been completely taken 
 over. It is impossible to believe that Shakespeare would 
 have resorted to their work merely to eke out impotently 
 at the finish a play which he himself had written to 
 that point. 
 
 But other work has intervened. Though Fleay's dates 
 will not stand, it is highly probable that, as he surmised, 
 the play has been composed in successive strata, the 
 Ulyssean matter having in particular no natural structural 
 connection with the central theme. And it is in the 
 Ulyssean matter that we find marked traces of Chapman's 
 vocabulary and way of thought. That the versification as 
 we have it is not his, need hardly be argued at length. 
 Never in his signed work does he approach to the large 
 rhythm and perfect cadence of the great dialogues of 
 this play. 
 
 The continuity, the long slow slope 
 And vast curve of the gradual violin, 
 
 are out of his compass. But that there is some other hand 
 
200 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 behind Shakespeare's has been felt by many critics. 
 Professor Mackail has remarked that 
 
 The extraordinary Latinisms of TroiliM and Creasida, which make its 
 diction different from that of all Shakespeare's other plays, are one 
 among many indications that this enigmatic and repellent drama was 
 -written under a powerful disturbing influence from without, and to some 
 degree against nature.' 
 
 Long ago, too, Verplanck noted the " large alloy of 
 inferior matter," the " singular words, unusual accentua- 
 tions, and bold experiments in language " ; and the final 
 difficulty, "how a drama which in so many of its parts 
 displays all the riches and energy of the poet's mind when 
 at its very zenith, should as a whole leave an effect so 
 impotent and incongruous." And Richard Grant White 
 notices with regard to the Ulyssean scenes " a singular lack 
 of that pecuHar characteristic of Shakespeare's dramatic 
 style, the marked distinction and nice discrimination of the 
 individual traits, mental and moral, of the various per- 
 sonages. . . . For example, no two men could be more 
 unlike in character than Achilles and Ulysses " ; yet their 
 speeches in Act III, Scene iii, 
 
 are made of the same metal and coined in the same mint; and they both 
 of them have the image and superscription of William Shakespeare. No 
 words or thoughts could be more unsuited to that bold, bloody egoist, 
 "the broad Achilles," than the reply he makes to Ulysses; but here 
 Shakespeare was merely using the Greek champion as a lay figure to 
 utter his own thoughts. . . . Ulysses thus flows over the whole serious 
 part of the play. Agamemnon, Nestor, ^neas, and the rest all talk 
 alike, and all like Ulysses." 
 
 And Mr. Deighton in his "Arden" edition of the play, 
 assents : 
 
 This similarity of tone and temperament cannot, it seems to me, be 
 denied. Tet to admit it is to admit that Shakespeare has for once failed 
 in what was the most distinctive mark of his superiority over all his com- 
 
 ' Essay before cited, p. 57, note. 
 ' Cited by Mr. Deighton. 
 
"TROILUS AND CRESSIDA" 201 
 
 peers, and that too in a play in which intellect is at its highest, which 
 displays the profoundest practical wisdom, the keenest insight into the 
 motives and impulses of human nature. Surely we have here another 
 incongruity added to the enigmas which baffle us in the general scheme.' 
 
 One qualification seems here to be necessary. The criti- 
 cisms of "White and Mr. Deighton were certainly not appHc- 
 able (save perhaps at points) to the Cressida scenes, but solely 
 to the ratiocinative discussions. There, however, they apply 
 unanswerably. What then is the solution ? I submit that 
 it is to be found in the recognition of an intervening hand 
 which drafted those discussions. And there are strong 
 reasons for believing that hand to be Chapman's. More 
 than any 2 dramatist of his time he was given to pseudo- 
 dramatic scene-writing in which theses are argued where 
 action should be developed; and in which any one of a 
 number of persons may equally well utter any of the 
 thoughts. His five main tragedies all conform to this 
 description. And in drafting the didactic matter of Troilxjs 
 AND Cressida he was not only expatiating in his natural 
 vein but working in narrative matter with which he was 
 especially familiar — the action of the Iliad. 
 
 The one difl&culty in the case put is to associate Chapman 
 with a play in parts of which much of the Homeric action 
 seems to be antipathetically treated. The lack of sympathy 
 is in parts so marked that it had seemed to many of us 
 natural to regard the play as in a measure a counterblast to 
 Chapman's general glorification of Homer. And it is quite 
 likely that an element of this kind was present in the play 
 of Dekker and Chettle which we have surmised to be the 
 primary basis of Shakespeare's. Chapman's way of acclaim- 
 ing Homer was provocative enough to create reaction in that 
 pugnacious period. But what seems to have happened 
 in the Achillean part of the story at the close is a severe 
 curtailment and compression, seeing that in three successive 
 
 ' Introd. to Troilus and Cressida, p. xxx. 
 
 ' Jonson is of course his great rival in this line. 
 
202 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 short speeches we have Agamemnon announcing " Patroclus 
 ta'en or slain " ; Nestor directing somebody to " Go, bear 
 Patroclus' body to Achilles " ; and Ulysses announcing that 
 Achilles " is arming, weeping, cursing, vowing vengeance." 
 It is after similarly kaleidoscopic episodes between Troilus 
 and Diomed, Hector and Achilles, with random interven- 
 tions of Ajax and " one in sumptuous armour," that we 
 have Achilles presented as instructing his Myrmidons to 
 surround and slay Hector, which, after another snap-scene, 
 they do. 
 
 It seems impossible that Chapman should have planned 
 this finish. It is true that, despite his championship of 
 Achilles in his running commentary on the Iliad, he shows 
 in his Eevbnge op Bussy D'Ambois (III. iii.) his 
 recognition of the evil side of the hero, impiger, iracundus : 
 
 When Homer makes Achilles passionate, 
 
 Wrathful, revengeful, and insatiate 
 
 In his affections ; what man will deny, 
 
 He did compose it all of industry 
 
 To let men see, that men of most renown, 
 
 Strong'st, noblest, fairest, if they set not down 
 
 Decrees within them, for disposing these. 
 
 Of judgment, resolution, uprightness, 
 
 And certain knowledge of their use and ends, 
 
 Mishap and misery no less extends 
 
 To their destruction, with all that they prized, 
 
 Than to the poorest, and the most despised.' 
 
 The speech gives a fair idea of how Chapman would have 
 drafted those of the great didactic scenes in Tegilus, 
 writing with false stresses, tediously, obscurely, even un- 
 grammatically, alternating rhyme with blank verse, in a 
 fashion which cried aloud for the transmuting hand of 
 Shakespeare. It also enables us to conceive of his 
 
 ' This speech, which ia wide of the mark of the Homeric Achilles, 
 raises the question whether Chapman was thinking of Essex, whom he 
 addressed as "renowned AchiUes" in the Epistle Dedicatory to his 
 Srvrn Books of the Iliads in 1598. 
 
"TROILUS AND CRESSIDA" 203 
 
 plotting the stratagem of Ulysses to sting Achilles into 
 action by playing on his vanity — an idea not to be found in 
 Homer, but likely enough to occur to Chapman, who in the 
 first two speeches of the fourth Act of Byeon's Tbagbdt 
 indicates and comments the situation of a personage once 
 admired and flattered and latterly passed by. Byron talks 
 very much like Achilles. It is even conceivable that, 
 having planned that departure from the tradition, he should 
 actually make Ulysses speak as if the primary cause of 
 the wrath of Achilles were not known to exist. It will be 
 remembered how in the Epistle Dedicatory to Ovid's 
 Banquet he stresses the importance of invention. 
 
 But nothing in his work makes it conceivable that he 
 would ever have represented Achilles as accomplishing the 
 death of Hector by surrounding him with Myrmidons 
 and making them do the slaying. To say nothing of the 
 extravagance of the degradation of the hero, such a finish 
 brings the whole action to the plane of burlesque. It was 
 bad enough to develop the elaborate stratagem of Ulysses to 
 no purpose, making Achilles finally arm merely to avenge 
 Patroclus, as in the Iliad. If Chapman's scheme involved 
 a final resort to the traditional motive, it is a futility of 
 plotting very much in the way of the action in Timon, where 
 Alcibiades is alternately supposed to be revenging himself 
 and avenging Timon. But the final degradation of Achilles 
 serves no purpose save one of derision and denigration 
 of the whole Homeric tale ; and such a purpose cannot 
 plausibly be associated with Chapman. 
 
 Is it then to be associated with Shakespeare? As it 
 happens, the closing scenes are precisely those which the 
 critics are most generally inclined to pronounce non- 
 Shakespearean ; and they visibly are so. We are driven 
 then to ask whether an amalgamation of Chapman matter 
 with Dekker and Chettle matter had taken place inde- 
 pendently of Shakespeare. Had Chapman taken over the 
 other play and incompletely remodelled it; or had the 
 
204 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 other dramatists either grafted their matter on Chapman's, 
 modifying his antipathetically, or simply burlesqued his 
 adored Iliad before Shakespeare went to work on the 
 amalgam ? "Was the murder of Hector, for instance, their 
 way of impugning the naif iniquity of the narrative, in 
 which Achilles gets divine armour and is physically aided by 
 Pallas in his combat with unaided Hector? 
 
 Such an alternative theory, which alone would cover 
 all the ground, seems incapable of proof, and we can but 
 leave it as a guess. But we can, I think, reach reason- 
 able certainty as to Chapman's drafting of the Ulysses- 
 Agamemnon-Nestor-Achilles scenes, perhaps as part of a 
 complete Achillean tragedy. The second of the two 
 opening speeches in Act IV of Byeon's Conspiracy, above 
 mentioned, ends with the lines : 
 
 And we must, like obsequious parasites, 
 Follow their faces, wind about their persons 
 For looks and answers, or be cast behind 
 Ho more view'd than the wallet of their faults. 
 
 Here we have a variant of Time's " wallet . . . wherein he 
 puts alms for oblivion " in Tboilus, IV. iii. 145. Chapman 
 gives the idea somewhat as it is in Spenser,' from whom 
 Shakespeare has been supposed to take it. But it is older 
 than Spenser, being used in a proverbial fashion by Foxe : 
 
 And so the archbishop, casting into the satchel beMnd him all those 
 Sir John Gostwike's ingratitudes, went to the King, and won to 
 Sir John his prince's favour again. 
 
 Aots and Monuments, ed. Cattley, viii. 27. 
 
 Here we have the ingratitudes of the play ; and this point 
 also is implicit in the Chapman passage. It is of course 
 arguable that Chapman may have heard this play, the 
 early stage history of which is so hard to trace ; and that 
 both the " wallet " tag and the coincidence between the 
 speech of B3a:on and that of Achilles (III. iii. 74) stand for 
 ' Faerie Queeiie, VI. viii. 24. 
 
"TROILUS AND CRESSIDA" 205 
 
 echoes by him. But throughout this and the other great 
 Ulyssean scene we have so many traces of Chapman's 
 vocabulary, and at the same time so much of his non- 
 dramatic didactic method, that the only fair inference 
 appears to be to count him the draftsman. Shakespeare, 
 surely, would not ot his own accord have made Achilles 
 and Ulysses carry on between them the same scholastic 
 argument : Chapman, we know, would : it was his way ; 
 and the debate between the sons of Priam over Helen 
 (II. ii.) is equally an exercise in his manner. 
 
 In particular, all the dialectic as to the eye " seeing not 
 itself," concerning which Grant White and Churton Collins 
 were so confident that it proved Shakespeare's study of 
 Plato's FiBST Alcibiadbs in the original, is rationally 
 to be traced, through Chapman, not to Plato but to 
 Sir John Davies, in whose NoscE Tbipsum, published in 
 1599, the thesis is expressly propounded.'^ From that poem 
 came the phrase "spirit of sense," which occurs in this scene 
 and also in the opening one (I. i. 58) , a circumstance that 
 admonishes us to date no earlier than 1599 Shakespeare's 
 revision of the Dekker-Chettle play. Of course Shakespeare 
 might have read Davies for himself, and introduced that 
 particular phrase ; but in the dialogue of Achilles and 
 Ulysses it is embedded in the argument about the eye ; 
 and if the opening scene be based on the prior play he 
 presumably took the expression from Chapman's matter. 
 (On the other hand, it is arguable that the opening 
 scene had also been drafted by Chapman.) The fact that 
 the theorem about the eye occurs also in Julius C^sar 
 (I. ii. 52) is another ground for suspecting Chapman's 
 connection with that play about the same time. 
 
 If, on the other hand, we ascribe to Chapman the 
 prologue to Tboilus, as was done by Grant White, we 
 
 ' As I have pointed out elsewhere, the idea had been made current 
 byj Cicero. But we do not find it in Tudor literature, I think, before 
 Davies. 
 
206 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 are again led to question whether Chapman may not 
 have had a hand even in the Troilus story. That the 
 prologue is non- Shakespearean was felt even by the 
 eighteenth-century editors, who also recognized other 
 alien matter. White pronounced that the style is "not 
 unlike " Chapman's.' It is really not particularly like 
 any style of the period in a general way, being in a special 
 prologue style which we find notably exhibited in the 
 prologues to Henry V and in some of those of Dekker 
 and Heywood. As I shall have to discuss later the 
 Henry V choruses, I leave the question of the Troilus 
 prologue to be handled in that connection, merely noting 
 here the independent support given to the Chapman 
 theory in general by White's suggestion, which was 
 made without any idea of a wider application. 
 
 For the rest, the general argument from phrase and 
 vocabulary is particularly strong. " The axle-tree on 
 which heaven rides " (I. iii. 66-7) is one of Chapman's 
 tags. It is often used by Marlowe, as by other poets ; 
 but it occurs only here in the Shakespeare plays ; and it is 
 employed at least" thrice by Chapman : 
 
 The axle-tree about which heaven hath his motion. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to Achillea' Shield. 
 
 Heaven's axle-tree. 
 
 18th Iliad, 441. 
 
 And may both points of heaven's straight axle-tree 
 Conjoin in one, before thyself and me. 
 
 Bussy D'Ambois, end. 
 
 And in the previous line in Tboilus we have " venerable 
 Nestor, hatch'd in silver," which recalls the " silver'd 
 
 • There is not much trace of his vocabulary ; but he uses both 
 responsive and responsible with the force of the corresponsive in the 
 Teoilus prologue ; and again correspondent in the sense of our 
 responsible. It is to be noted, however, that the prologue does not 
 appear in the quartos. It may thus be of considerably later date than 
 1609. It may indeed have been penned, as the Cambridge editors seem 
 to suggest, to fill a blank page in the Folio, though this seems unlikely. 
 
"TROILUS AND CRESSIDA" 207 
 
 and hatch'd " of Chapman, '23rd Iliad, 701. The " flexible " 
 of line 50 occurs only here and in the non-Shakespearean 
 3 Henry VI ; but it is a common word with Chapman. 
 Alike common and uncommon words in this play point to 
 him. Tortive and errant, occurring together (I. iii. 9), 
 are both once-used words ; and the common errant is often 
 used by Chapman, while tortive is eminently suggestive 
 of his mint. The odd phrase, " of less expect " (1. 70) 
 points to his " expectless " ; and " importless," in the next 
 line, also a once-used term, suggests the same hand. 
 
 Among the other words special to this play are imbecility, 
 propension, protractive, persistive, mastic, insisture, pro- 
 pugnation, oppugnancy, topless, transcends, conduce (twice), 
 perspicuous, directive, disorb'd, sphered (twice), benumbed, 
 assubjugate, pasli (verb : twice), erudition, antiquary, 
 repured, expostulation, uncomprehensive, emulous (four 
 times), changeful, characterless, soilure, violenteth, re- 
 joindure,^ embrasure, maculation, deedless, commixtion, 
 vindicative, dexter, subduements, mirable,^ expecters, ex- 
 pectance,3 convive, immaterial, indistinguishable, rivelled, 
 constringed, enrapt, imminence, inveigle. 
 
 These forty-seven words I have jioted on a quite cursory 
 search; and the number, I think, could easily be more 
 than doubled, especially if there were added the words 
 which occur only in Teoiltjs and in other " suspected " 
 plays. Without special search in this connection, I can 
 find sixteen of them in Chapman : 
 
 1. Imbecility. Comm. on 13th Iliad, 1. 556. 
 
 2. Propension. Hom. Hymn to Earth. 
 
 3. Topless. Tears op Peace : Invocatio ; 1st Iliad, first 
 
 version (Shepherd, p. 536) ; 18th Ihad, 184 ; Shadow 
 OF Night : Poems, p. 12a. 
 
 ' The word rejoin never occurs in Shakespeare. 
 
 ' This is an old word, found in a Mystery play ; but the line in which 
 it occurs is very doubtful. 
 
 3 Expectancy occurs in Hamlet and Othkllo. 
 
208 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 4. Transcend. Last ref. same page, 2nd col. ; Mask, Son^ 
 
 of Love and Beauty ; and often elsewhere. I have 
 noted eight instances. 
 
 5. Conduce. Ovid's Banquet, st. 55 ; Horn. Hymn tc 
 
 Jove ; Epist. Ded. to Bacon. 
 
 6. Perspicuous. Epist. Ded. to Ovid's Banquet; Pref 
 
 to the Understander, with Achilles' Shield. 
 
 7. Sphered. Heed and Leandeb, iii. 144 ; 24th Iliad, 
 
 668, and elsewhere. 
 
 8. Benumb' d. Bussy D'Ambois, V. iv. 181; Fbag. as 
 
 Teabs of Peace : Poems, p. 154a, etc. 
 
 9. Pash. 13th Iliad, 299 ; 12th Odyssey, 580. 
 
 10. Erudition. Htmntjs in Noctem, § 8. 
 
 11. Expectance. Epicbdium : Poems, p. 1716 ; Bxbon's 
 
 Teagedy, V. i. 55; 11th Odyssey, 475. 
 
 12. Emulous. 5th Odyssey, 163 ; 18th Iliad, 185. 
 
 13. Deedless. 5th Iliad, 475 ; May Day, II. iv. ; Heed 
 
 AND Leandeb, vi. 64. 
 
 14. Commixtion. 10th Odyssey, 640. 
 
 15. Assubjugate. This quasi-French form I do not find in 
 
 Chapman or any other Elizabethan; but he has 
 subjugate, which never occurs in Shakespeare. 
 
 16. Inveigle. 4th Odyssey, 523. 
 
 Of the remaining words some, I think, are used by 
 Chapman, though I have not kept the references. The 
 formations uncomprehensive and indistinguishable are 
 matched by his incomprehensible (same force) and un- 
 distinguish'd. Directive is the equivalent of his directful. 
 Protractive and persistive are nonce-words in his manner : 
 he has protract and protraction ; whereas protract occurs 
 only in Cymbbline and 1 Heney VI in Shakespeare. 
 Expostulatio occurs as a rubric to the Epicedium ; and he 
 so often has rapt and so many en formations that the 
 word enrapt is nearly sure to be his. I have not noted 
 dexter in his signed work, but he uses dexterous in the 
 
"TROILUS AND CRESSIDA" 209 
 
 primary sense (21st Iliad, 161). Though not repure, I find 
 in him repurify (6th Odyssey, 49, 85). Disorbed is likely to 
 be by the author of orbed and unsphered. Constringed 
 appears here to be new, but this is not certain. Insisture 
 is a coinage which has come to nothing, and its meaning is 
 problematic. Everywhere in the list the probability of 
 coinage or use points to him. As to mastic, which has 
 been held to point to Histeiomastix and Satibomastix, 
 I hazard anew the old suggestion that it may have nothing 
 to do with either, but may be a misprint for the vernacular 
 mastie, which has the force of large and strong (see Foster's 
 Woed-Book), and is also a name for a breed of dog 
 resembling the mastiff. This word Chapman actually 
 uses in Sir Giles Goosecap : "a mastie dog " (III. i. 97 : 
 cf. Professor Parrott's note). " Eank," which occurs in the 
 same line in Teoiltjs, is a common term with Chapman. 
 
 If, finally, a list be made of words in this play occurring 
 elsewhere only in Heney V and Cymbeline or some other 
 late or mixed play, the proportion common to Chapman will 
 be found notably large. 
 
 U 
 
§ 3. " CLASSICAL " INTERLUDES 
 
 Aa the three plays in which, with different degrees of proof, 
 we have seen reason to suppose Chapman had a share, are 
 all founded on " classical " themes, we may naturally 
 inquire whether his hand is to be traced in certain inter- 
 ludes in the Shakespeare plays which have at various times 
 been called in question as apparently alien matter. And 
 first we may consider 
 
 (a) The Masque in the " Tempest." 
 
 Fleay makes the notable suggestion that " the lines 
 forming the masque in IV, i. are " palpably an addition, 
 probably made by Beaumont for the Court performance 
 before the Prince, the Princess Elizabeth, and the Palatine 
 in 1612-13 ; or else before the King on 1st November 
 1612." ' The Cambridge Editors had previously put the 
 view that the masque is non- Shakespearean ; and it will 
 probably be felt by most critical readers to be rather 
 uninspired matter for the Master at a time when he could 
 write the speech of Prospero which follows. The sugges- 
 tion that Beaumont was the author is fairly well grounded. 
 Fleay notes these points of coincidence: 
 
 1. Thy banks with pioned and twilled brims. 
 
 Tempest. 
 
 Boirdered with sedges and water-flowers. 
 
 Beaumont's Inner Temple Masque of 1613— 
 {The Device or Argument). 
 
 Naiades with sedged crowns. 
 
 Tempest. 
 
 ' Life of Shakespeare, p. 249. 
 210 
 
"CLASSICAL" INTERLUDES 211 
 
 2. Blessing . . . and increasing. Tempest.\ 
 Blessing and increase. Inner Temple Masque. 
 
 3. The main part played by Iris in both. 
 
 4. The dance of the Naiads in both. Many of the properties could 
 
 be utilized in both performances. 
 
 It can hardly be doubted that there was some link 
 between the two masques ; but the last item suggests 
 the possibility of partial imitation as an alternative to the 
 inference of common authorship. " Blessing and increase " 
 was a standing phrase, and the parallel is not exact ; while 
 the words about the river brims are part of the prose 
 description in Beaumont. In support of the Beaumont 
 theory I might note the resemblance of cadence between 
 the Tempest lines : 
 
 Vines with clustering bunches growing 
 Plants with goodly burthen bowing, 
 
 and two in the priest's chant in Act II, Scene ii, of 
 Fletcher's Faithful Shephebdbss, as well as parts of a 
 number of the songs in the partner plays. This, however, 
 is a slight feature, which also might be a matter of 
 imitation; and as Chapman produced his Mask op the 
 Middle Temple and Lincoln's Inn in 1613, "at the 
 princely celebration of the most royal nuptials of the Pals- 
 grave and his thrice gratious Princess Elizabeth," it seems 
 worth while to make a fuller investigation. 
 
 In the 68 rhymed lines which constitute the interlude 
 there are eighteen words which occur nowhere else in 
 the plays: 
 
 Vetches betrims bed-right 
 
 turfy broom-groves windring (?) 
 
 stover lorn (lass-lorn) sedged 
 
 pioned marge (sea-marge) sicklemen 
 
 twilled bosky furrow (noun) 
 
 brims unshrubb'd rye-straw 
 
212 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 To these might be added the combination pole-cUpt ; but 
 that, hke waspish-headed, rocky-hard, short-grass' d, and 
 grass-plot, being a case of bracketing rather than of specific 
 naming, like rye-straw, maj' be set aside as non-significant. 
 Then there are two words which point to parts of Timon, 
 one ostensibly written by Chapman as it stands, the other 
 an apparently rewritten Chapman speech: 
 
 Donation (Timon, III. ii. 90). 
 Crisp (Timon, IV. iii. 183). 
 
 Further, we have some words and a phrase each found only 
 here and in one or two other plays : 
 
 Leas (Hbnby V, V. ii. 44). 
 
 Scandal'd (CoBiOLANUS, III. i. 44; Ctmbblinb, III. 
 
 iv. 62). 
 Many-colour'd messenger (All's Well, I. iii. 158). 
 
 It is, to say the least, an odd coincidence that the last three 
 all connect with Chapman : 
 
 Leas. Hymn to Heemes (Poems, 296a) ; Eugenia 
 (3276) ; 11th Iliad, 104. 
 
 Scandal'd. Eevengb of Busst, I. i. 329; Justifica- 
 tion: DiAiiOGUS, 1. 9; "Scandal" (vb.) Chabot, 
 I. ii. 133 ; " Scandalling," 22nd Odyssey, 586 ; 
 34th Odyssey, 616. 
 
 Many colour' d messenger. " The thousand colour'd 
 Dame " (Iris) : 3rd Iliad, 145. (Homer simply has : 
 " the Goddess.") 
 " She that wears the thousand-colour'd hair " : 23rd 
 Iliad, 182. (Again, no such epithet in Homer.) 
 
 Again, the word scarcity occurs, in the Shakespeare 
 
 plays,! only in this masque and in Timon (II. ii. 234) and 
 
 Pericles (I. iii. 302), which we have seen some reason to 
 
 connect with Chapman ; and sunburnt occurs only in this 
 
 ' It is found, however, in Vetiua and Adonis, 1. 753, 
 
"CLASSICAL" INTERLUDES 213 
 
 masque, Much Ado, and Teoilub, whereas it is found 
 thrice in Chapman — Odyssey, xvii. ; Iliad, iv. 557 ; xxiv. 
 358. Dusky, too, is found only in 2 Hbney VI and 
 EiCHABD III, apart from this masque, and this occurs in 
 Chapman's Andromeda : Poems, p. 1826. 
 
 Of the once-used words, however, I have noticed only a 
 few in Chapman: 
 
 Brims. Trans, of 5th Satire of Juvenal : Poems, p. 265a. 
 Bed-right. This should probably be read bed-rite. 
 Chapman has : 
 
 Here bed-rites offered, but no hymns of praise. 
 
 Trans, of Museeus : p. 100a. 
 
 Also in A Good Woman : p. 1516. 
 
 Furrow. The noun occurs in Chapman's separate version 
 of the Shield of Achilles, twice ; also in the 13th Ihad, 629. 
 
 Bye-straw hats. Compare " sheav'd hat " in the Com- 
 plaint ; and "hats of parching Thessaly, broad-brimm'd, 
 high crowned," in C^sab and Pompey, V. i. 68. 
 
 Broom-groves is admittedly a doubtful expression. 
 Chapman has home-groves in Eugenia (p. 3276) ; but that 
 is not lucid either : 
 
 Haunting the home-groves husbandmen manured. 
 
 A dubious guess suggests itself as to holm-groves^ — holm 
 being pronounced home. Marlowe has : 
 
 Elysium hath a wood of holm-trees hlacTc, 
 Whose earth does not perpetual green grass lack ; 
 There good birds rest — 
 
 this in rendering Ovid's parrot's farewell (El. II. vi.). 
 
 Twilled is another crux, some editors preferring to read 
 lilied. It was noted by Steevens that Chapman speaks of 
 twillpemts in Ovid's Banquet. This appears to stand for 
 
 ■ (Compare " Grove of oaHs" in Bussy D'Ampois, V, iv. 104, 
 
214 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 tidipants = tulips ; and it is not known whether " twill ' 
 or " twillip " was a vernacular form. If either were 
 "twill'd" or " twillip'd " might be the right reading. 
 
 I would add that "crisp," which Mr. Moreton Luc( 
 in his "Arden" edition here interprets as "covered witli 
 wavelets," and in Timon as " covered with small clouds,' 
 probably means simply " curled" in the sense of " curved." ' 
 "Crisp head" in 1 Henry IV (I. iii. 106) does mear 
 " covered with wavelets " ; but in the Mebchant (III, 
 ii. 92) "crisped . . . locks " are just curls; and Chapman's 
 " crisps' implies " in the Amoeotjs Zodiac (st. vii) mean 
 "folds of curls." "Crisp heaven" in Timon stands for 
 " curved heaven," just as his " crooked," a score of times ii 
 not invariably, means " curved "= (as in Marlowe and 
 before him), not angular or zig-zag. " Crisp channels," 
 then, are curved or winding channels; and this use of 
 the word points to the use in Timon. As to "saffron," 
 of which Mr. Luce points out the classical derivation, I 
 would note that this epithet is frequent in Chapman. 
 (Poems, p. 87-9; 8th Iliad, 1; 12th Odyssey, 12; and 
 elsewhere.) 
 
 This does not amount to much ; and if more verbal 
 and other coincidences are to be found in Beaumont, the 
 decision must be on that side. Thus far, however, I 
 have not found any ; and I would suggest the probability 
 (1) that Chapman would see Beaumont's elaborate masque, 
 and (2) that its details might suggest some of the 
 imagery of that in the Tempest. It may be added that 
 the phrase "her deity" is a form repeatedly found in 
 Chapman (" her deity," " your deities," " thy deity," 
 "my deity"); that the terms turfy, bosky, unshrubb'd 
 (which recalls his shrubby), are very much in his manner ; 
 and that the coupled epithets are also like him. 
 
 ' Mr. Luce's view was first suggested hj Steev$ns, Mine, I find, wa^ 
 put by Upton. 
 ' See above, p. 34. 
 
"CLASSICAL" INTERLUDES 215 
 
 Finally, " spongy April " recalls Chapman's 
 
 Earth, at this spring, epongy and langnorsome. 
 
 Amorous Zodiac, St. vii ; 
 
 and he uses the verb " trim," in various flections, a 
 score of times, though I do not remember an instance of 
 " betrims." 
 
 (6) The Interludes in " Hamlet." 
 
 Several attempts have been made to find an author for 
 the speech declaimed by Hamlet as a reminiscence from 
 " an excellent play, well digested in the scenes, set down 
 with as much modesty as cunning," but which " was never 
 acted." Fleay suggested that Shakespeare wrote the speech 
 in 1594, in rivalry with the scene (II. i.) in the Dido of 
 Marlowe and Nashe, in which ^neas describes the sack 
 of Troy, and saw fit to use it in 1601. There can be little 
 doubt that the Pyrrhus speech in Hamlet is an imitation 
 of that in Dido as to versification ; but some of us find it 
 hard to believe that Shakespeare, had he done such an 
 archaistic exercise in his earlier days, would deliberately 
 have paid excessive compliments to it when he was able 
 to write Hamlet. Seeking a more plausible theory, one 
 asks whether it may have been part of an early classical 
 tragedy by Chapman, who certainly imitated Marlowe in 
 his early period. I cannot profess to find any marked 
 resemblance to any single piece of his published verse in 
 this archaistic extract ; but it is worth noticing that the 
 vocabulary suggests him: for instance, the words sable, 
 ominous, smear'd, impasted, coagulate, repugnant, declined, 
 rack, nave, spokes, and fellies, are all found or indicated in 
 his work; and those italicized do not occur elsewhere in 
 Shakespeare. Coagulate occurs in All Fools, IV, near 
 end. Bepu^nant he uses frequently. Fellies is the word 
 which Chapman twice spells felffs or felfs ; and impasted is 
 formed from his paste. As against eterne be several times 
 
216 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 has eternnesse. Lank occurs only here and in 2 Henry VI 
 (lank-lean in Prologue iv in Henry V), and this is found 
 in Chapman (To Young Imaginaeies : Poems, p. 1606 ; 
 and Eugenia, p. 3316). The " whiff and wind of his fell 
 sword," again, connects with Tboilus, V. iii. 41. It is 
 derived from Dido, II. i. But what most strongly suggests 
 him is the passage : 
 
 His sword 
 Which was declining on the milky head 
 Of reverend Priam, seem'd i' the air to stich. 
 
 Gules, it may be added, occurs only in Timon (IV. iii. 59), 
 apart from this speech; and in the Timon scene we have 
 found a number of once-used words which occur in 
 Chapman. 
 
 Leaving the problem at that, I turn to the play-within- 
 the-play in Hamlet, where again we have an archaistic 
 style, with rhyme. Here, indeed, we might reasonably 
 suppose that Shakespeare would write the scene penned 
 by Hamlet for the players. But I would call attention to 
 the fact that the two rhymed speeches in Othello, I. iii. 
 199-219, which appear to be interpolated between lines 198 
 and 220, and are plainly non-Shakespearean, are very much 
 in the manner of the play-scene in Hamlet. That they 
 should be Chapman's does not at first seem likely : but il 
 they be compared with the many rhymed passages which 
 he inserts in his tragedies, they will be seen, I think, to be 
 very similar in quality to those. For instance : 
 
 'Tis thine own dear twin. 
 No man can add height to a woman's sin. 
 Vice never doth her just height so provoke 
 As when she rageth under virtue's cloak. 
 
 Bussy D'Ambois, V. i. 99-102 
 
 She cannot live, and this unwreak'd sustain. 
 The woes are bloody that in woman reign. 
 The Sicile gulf keeps fear in less degree ; 
 There is no tiger not more tame than she. 
 
 fievenge of Btusy, IV. ii. 35-8 
 
"CLASSICAL" INTERLUDES 217 
 
 Whom you discover you neglect, but ope 
 A ruinous passage to your own best hope. 
 
 Id. V. ii. 19-20. 
 
 As when the moon hath comforted the night, 
 And set the world in silver of her light. 
 
 Byron's Conspiracy, III. i. 6. 
 
 Ivory, brass and gold 
 That thieves may purchase, and be bought and sold, 
 Shall not be used about me ; lasting worth 
 Shall only set the Duke of Byron forth. 
 
 Id. III. ii. 174-7. 
 
 Be what he will, men in themselves entire 
 March safe with naked feet on coals of fire. 
 
 Id. ib. 227-8. 
 
 A string of couplets of this stamp would produce just the 
 kind of effect made in the Othello passage and the play- 
 scene ; and in the latter such couplets as : 
 
 Where joy most revels, grief doth most lament; 
 Grief joys, joy grieves, on slender accident, 
 
 are markedly in Chapman's manner. There are clues of 
 vocabulary, too, which obtrude themselves, as " Tellus' 
 orbfed ground." "Tellus" occurs elsewhere only in a 
 clearly non- Shakespearean part of the Shbew and in 
 Pbbicles, IV. i. 14 ; whereas it is frequent in Chapman ; 
 and we have seen that " orbed " is his word in the Com- 
 plaint. In this scene, too, we have enacture, which 
 compares with acture in the Complaint. Opera/nt, again, 
 occurs only here and in TiMON (IV. iii. 25) ; in the scene in 
 which we have found so much of the vocabulary of Chapman. 
 Beyond this there is little to be said, the clues of stick and 
 scope (11. 200, 229) having here little importance. But it 
 may be added that the theme of second marriages, on which 
 the Player Queen enlarges, is much discussed in Thb 
 Widow's Tears, in the same strain, with much the same 
 moral. Compare : 
 
 None wed the second but who Hilled the first. 
 
 ^a1nlet, 
 
218 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 That to weA the second was no better than to cuckold the first. 
 
 The Widow's Tears, II. iv. 30. 
 
 Could it be that Shakespeare was again giving Chapman 
 a " lift " ? There is an alternative or modified hypothesis, 
 v?hich will fall to be considered later in connection with 
 All's Well that Ends Well. 
 
 (c) The Interlude in " Cymbeline." 
 
 There is nothing here so strongly suggestive of Chapman 
 as the " thunder-stone " of the song in IV. iii. 258-81, 
 which is surely non- Shakespearean. That word, which for 
 Lowell and others has been sufficient to turn the scales 
 against the line : " Like chimney-sweepers, come to dust," 
 occurs twice in Chapman (Teabs op Peace : Poems, 
 p. 1206; 15th Iliad, 117).' But in the dream interlude 
 (V. iv. 87) we have the " marble mansion" of Timon ; and 
 the whole of the quaint rhymed verse is much more in 
 Chapman's way than in Shakespeare's. That it is non- 
 Shakespearean has been the view of many critics. But the 
 problem does not end there. It is so difficult to conceive 
 Shakespeare in his last years planning Cymbeline as it 
 stands, that even German conservatism has accepted 
 Coleridge's theory of it as a play written by the Master 
 in his youth and rewritten in his last theatrical years. In 
 point of central theme it certainly belongs to the pre- 
 Shakespearean chronicle-play type ; but just as evidently 
 the sub-plot is late. Long ago I surmised from some 
 verbal clues that the original play was partly Peele's. But 
 there is little of Peele left ; and one cannot even assign to 
 him with confidence the absurd etymology of mulier from 
 mollis aer, which, as it happens, is to be found in Caxton's 
 Game of Chess. A number of verbal clues,= however, and 
 many items of style and phrase, raise the question whether 
 
 ' Compare " thunder-stocks " in Edgenia — Inductio : p. 327a. 
 ' Fpr instance, " crooked " = purving. See above, p. 34, 
 
"CLASSICAL" INTERLUDES 219 
 
 Chapman had not a considerable share in the recast. The 
 problem needs as careful detailed handling as does that 
 of TiMON ; and I do not propose here to do more than 
 indicate it. 
 
 Some of the apparent clues may be misleading. 
 " Thunder-stone " and the song containing it may have 
 been in the old play : a number of apparently out-of-the- 
 way words used by Chapman, such as rampired, delight- 
 some, wreakful, gratulate, topless, are to be found in the 
 pre-Shakespeareans. But " thunder-stone " occurs in 
 Julius C>assAR (I. iii. 49), to which play we have been 
 several times pointed by verbal clues in our inquiry ; and 
 a complete investigation will have to take it into account. 
 
§ 4. "JULIUS C^SAR" 
 
 Flbay accounted for the imperfectly Shakespearean flavour 
 of much of the style of Julius C^sar by a theory that 
 it had originally been a double play ; and that Ben Jonson 
 had been employed by the company after Shakespeare's 
 death to condense it into one. There are certainly many 
 marks of condensation, as Fleay points out ; and the 
 hypothesis that there had originally been two plays would 
 at least account for the anomaly, noted by so many critics, 
 that Caesar is not the hero of his own tragedy ; as well as 
 for that of the duplicated account of Portia's death (the first 
 being evidently planned to supersede the second) ; for the 
 marked differences between the Brutus of the earlier Acts 
 and the Brutus of the fourth ; and for the many instances 
 in which the action is so telescoped as to be unintelligible 
 to a reader unacquainted with the history. The fact, 
 again, that Jonson in his posthumous Discoveries affirms 
 that Shakespeare wrote : 
 
 Csesar did never wrong but with just cause, 
 
 lends itself to the theory that Ben was employed to 
 condense the supposed double play, seeing that the passage 
 there stands (III. i. 47) : 
 
 Enow, Ceesar doth not wrong, nor without cause 
 Will he be satisfied ; 
 
 which is just the sort of thing that Ben |would have made 
 of it. 
 But all this proceeds on the assumption that the original 
 
"JULIUS O^SAR" 221 
 
 double play was wholly Shakespeare's ; and I would suggest 
 an inquiry as to whether the foundation plays were not 
 pre-Shakespearean, and whether here again some of the 
 classical substratum may not have been supplied by 
 Chapman. It is not merely the verbal clues, though they 
 are noteworthy (" colossus," ^ for instance, is a tic of 
 Chapman's), that set up speculation. Several passages 
 tell of another mind than Shakespeare's : this, for instance, 
 in the first scene of the third Act : 
 
 Cos. . . . How many ages hence 
 
 Shall this our lofty scene be acted over 
 
 In states unborn and accents yet unknown I 
 
 Bru. How majiy tunes shall Csesar bleed in sport, 
 That now on Fompey's basis lies along 
 Ko worthier than the dust I 
 
 Cos. So oft as that shall be,' 
 
 So often shall the knot of us be call'd 
 The men that gave their country liberty. 
 
 Bee. What, shall we forth? 
 
 Cas. Ay, every man away : 
 
 Brutus shall lead : and we will grace his heels 
 With the most noblest and best hearts of Borne. 
 
 If Shakespeare wrote that, " once more, if so, the less 
 Shakespeare he." It is all dramatically false ; and the 
 style is as unlike him as the matter. Mr. Macmillan, who 
 in his careful edition of the play does not fully face the 
 problems above indicated, is content to say that " Shake- 
 speare puts into the mouth of Cassius and Brutus a 
 prediction of the drama which he is composing." I am 
 unable to believe that such an idea could have occurred 
 to Shakespeare in regard to this play any more than in 
 regard to Cobiolanus or Antony and Clbopatba. The 
 
 ' The occurrence of this in an apparently spurious scene of Faustds 
 raises another problem. But the word seems to have come in with 
 Spenser. 
 
222 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 lines are those of a scholarly person who was aware that 
 the theme had already been repeatedly dramatized, and who 
 lost sight of all dramatic fitness in communicating his 
 reflection to his audience. I would more readily, I confess, 
 impute to one of the pre-Shakespeareans ' than to Chapman 
 such a dramatic procedure, and such lines as : 
 
 Stoop, Bomans, stoop, 
 And let us bathe our hands in Caesar's blood 
 Up to the elbows, and besmear our swords : 
 Then waU; we forth, even to the market-place : 
 And, waving our red weapons o'er our heads, 
 Let's all cry " Peace, freedom and liberty ! " 
 
 The last three lines, with their "Let's all cry," are feeble 
 enough for Peele. To assign them tentatively to Chapman 
 is not to help his reputation. But it is the fact that the 
 sentiment of the conspiracy and the assassination is 
 Chapman's as indicated |by his Tbagedy op C^sab and 
 PoMPET, which, he tells in the Epistle Dedicatory, never 
 touched the stage. 
 
 That late-published play, in Fleay's opinion, was a 
 comparatively early one; and the epistle justifies him. 
 Now, if Chapman wrote an early play on Caesar and 
 Pompey, he was a likely man to try to carry the history 
 further ; and the moral key of Julius C^sar is the key of 
 his published play. If, on the other hand, he drafted 
 Julius C^sab, or recast a previous play, it was certainly 
 in the main again rewritten. The double-endings in C^SAS 
 AND Pompey are fully twice as numerous as those in our 
 play ; and, indeed, there is little suggestion of his tragic 
 style, as apart from vocabulary ; though some of the verse 
 — e.g. the Portia scene — is akin alike in manner and 
 
 ' Mr. Macmillan admits that in the parley which opens the fifth Act 
 the recriminations of the leaders, which are not suggested by anything 
 in Plutarch, " remind us of the bandying of abuse between Warwick 
 
 . . and Edward and Gloucester " in 3 Henry VI, and of passages in 
 1 Henry VI — which, jpace Mr. Macmillan, are not by Shakespeare. 
 
"JULIUS CiESAR" 223 
 
 purport to the serious verse in The Gentleman Ushbb. 
 But for the origination of the play we must choose between 
 Chapman and some other ; that Shakespeare planned it as 
 it stands is to me, at least, inconceivable. It is wholly 
 inadequate to its titular theme. It is conceivable, on the 
 other hand, that Chapman, who in C^sar and Pompey 
 makes much more of Pompey than of Caesar, and more 
 of Cato than of Pompey, should have brought in Csesar 
 mainly to pose and be assassinated; though it is hardly 
 likely that even he would not present Caesar in his greatness 
 before exhibiting him in his decay. The speech of Marullus 
 in the opening scene certainly carries on the key of 
 Chapman's play, but a severe compression must have taken 
 place to produce the present anomalous drama. 
 
 If, further, it was of Chapman's drafting or recasting, it 
 is rewritten ; the style is not his, and the low proportion 
 of double-endings is impossible for him after 1598. The 
 words "concave" and "replications" suggest him, as do, 
 later in the scene, " cogitations," found only in the 
 Winteb's Tale apart from this play; "hug"; and the 
 verb " scandal," found only in the interlude in the Tempest, 
 CoRiOLANUS, and Ctmbeline. But the total proportion 
 of double-endings in the play (19 per cent, of the blank 
 verse) is far below his in CaiSAE and Pompey; and Ben 
 Jonson's revision would not have operated in that way, his 
 own proportion being high. One would rather infer from 
 the metrical phenomena that Shakespeare had done most 
 of his recast even before 1599, the date assigned to the 
 play by Mr. Macmillan, on good grounds; and that the 
 proportion of double-endings in parts of the play had been 
 increased by Jonson's revision. In the opening scene there 
 are only two in fifty lines of blank-verse. Altogether, 
 there is ground for surmising an original play by some of 
 the pre-Shakespeareans, who were likely enough to try 
 one on this theme. 
 
 With regard to the hypothesis of a revision by Jonson, 
 
224 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 it should be noted that Fleay shows substantial grounds in 
 the diction and in other respects : 
 
 1. Elsewhere, Shakespeare always spells Anthony or 
 Anthonie with the h : here it is always Antony or Antonie, 
 as in Jonson. 
 
 (But we have Marc Antonio in Chapman's All Pools, 
 and Antonius, as well as Anthony, in C^SAK and Pompet.) 
 
 2. The number of participles in -ed, with the final 
 syllable sounded, is unusually large. 
 
 3. The phrase "I will come home to you" (I. ii. 309) 
 does not occur elsewhere in Shakespeare. Jofison has it 
 in Catiline, III. i. 
 
 4. The phrase " quality and kind " (II. iii. 64) is in the 
 same case. Jonson has " kind and quality " in Every 
 Man in His Humoub, II. i. 
 
 5. The phrase " bear me hard " occurs thrice in this 
 play (I. ii. 317 ; II. i. 215 ; III. i. 157), not elsewhere in 
 Shakespeare. Jonson has it in Catiline, IV. v. 
 
 6. The number of short lines in the play, where no pause 
 is required, is very great, and seems to indicate a process 
 of abridgment. 
 
 7. In II. i. 26, " degrees " is used with the meaning of 
 steps or stairs. This occurs nowhere else in Shakespeare, 
 but is found in Sejanus. (On this head, however, I 
 would point out that degrees = steps are specified in the 
 stage directions for Scene ii of the first Act of CsiSAB 
 
 AND POMPET.) 
 
 8. The passage V. v. 73-5 is closely paralleled in 
 Cynthia's Eevbls, II. iii. 
 
 Some of his arguments Fleay afterwards dropped, notably 
 his assumption that Shakespeare had been Jonson's coad- 
 jutor in Sejanus. Latterly he came to the more probable 
 view that the colleague was Chapman, who took alarm after 
 Jonson's prosecution. But it is time that the problem 
 should be critically investigated, in the light both of the 
 Jonson and the Chapman data. As suggesting that 
 
"JULIUS C^SAR" 225 
 
 Chapman may have been concerned even in the poor 
 matter of Act V, Scene i (where the better matter is very 
 much in his manner), I may point out that the form 
 "worthless of," with the force of "unworthy of" (1. 61), 
 found nowhere else in the plays, occurs in Byron's 
 CoNSPiBACY, V. ii. 213. But this, again, is found in 
 Jonson (Poetaster, V. i.)- Oddly, it is put in the mouth 
 of Virgil, supposed by some to stand for Chapman — a likely 
 hypothesis enough, seeing that till late in life Jonson and 
 Chapman were warm and mutually panegyrical friends. 
 In this connection it might be worth inquiring whether 
 the piece of translation from the fourth ^neid in the fifth 
 Act of the Poetaster may be really a fragment by 
 Chapman. It has several of his tic-words. 
 
 15 
 
§5. "THE TAMING OF THE SHEEW 
 
 The Sheew has always been one of the deeply doubted 
 plays; and no convincing solution has yet been found for 
 the problem of its authorship. Meres makes no mention 
 of it in 1598, unless it was then known as Love's Laboub's 
 Won, and that is distinctly unlikely. Fleay has most fully 
 canvassed the question, and we may usefully consider his 
 early theory, untenable as it is : 
 
 The Twmmg of the Shraw is tittlike any play hitherto considered ; the 
 Shakespeare part of it being evidently confined to the Katharine and 
 Petmohio scenes : 
 
 II. i. 167-826. 
 
 III. u., except 180-160, 240-2S4. 
 
 rV. i. iii. v., except three lines at end. 
 V. ii., except ten lines at conclusion. 
 
 The construction of the play shows that it was not composed by 
 Shakespeare in conjunction with another author, but that his additions 
 are replacements of the original author's work ; alterations made 
 hurriedly for some occasion when it was not thought worth while to 
 write an entirely new play. Such an occasion was the plague year 
 of 1608, when the theatres were closed and the companies had to travel. 
 . . . This date is confirmed by the aJlusion to other taming plays, of 
 which there were several ; the present play, in its altered shape, being 
 probably the latest : II. i. 297 refers to Patient G-bissel, by Dekker, 
 Ohettle, and Houghton, December 1599 ; " curst " in II. i. 187, 294, 807, 
 V. 2, 188, to Dekker's Medicine for a Cwet Wife ; and IV. i. 221 to 
 Heywood's Woman killed with Kindness, March 1608. 
 
 There is nothing but the supposed inferiority of work to imply an 
 earlier date; and this, on examination, will be seen to be merely a 
 subjective inference arising from the reflex action of the less worthy 
 portion with which Shakespeare's is associated. " Budesby " in III. ii 
 10 is from Sir Gil** Oooteeoup (1601) ; and Baptista, as a man's name, 
 
"THE TAMING OF THE SHREW" 227 
 
 oonld hardly have come under Shakespeare's notiioe when in hia HamIiET 
 he made it a woman's. 
 
 The earlier play thus altered probably dates 1696, when an edition of 
 The Taming of A Shrew was reprinted. This last-named play was 
 written for Pembroke's company in 1588-9. Another limit of date is 
 given by the name Sineklo in the Induction. Sinklo was an actor with 
 the Chamberlain's men from 1597 to 1604. NicJce in lY. i. is Nicholas 
 Tooley. The play is not mentioned by Meres in 1598. In the Induction, 
 " The Slys are no rogues : we came in with Richard Conqueror," is, 
 I think, an allusion to the stage history of the time ; Sly and Biohard 
 the Third (Burbadge) came into Lord Strange's company together in 
 1591. . . . 
 
 The Induction, partly revised by Shakespeare, seems to have been 
 clumsily fitted by the players (as, indeed, the whole play is, especially in 
 the non-appearance of " my cousin Ferdinand," IV. i. 154) : surely Sly 
 ought to have been replaced, as in the 1688 play : and is it possible that 
 Shakespeare even in a farce should have made Sly talk blank-verse, 
 So. ii, line 60-120? 
 
 The Taming of A Bhrew, as acted in June 1694 at Newington Butts, 
 was the old play which had belonged to Pembroke's men, probably by 
 Kyd ; but the first version of the [i.e. the latter] play, afterwards 
 altered by Shakespeare, was written, I think, by Lodge (aided by 
 Drayton in the Induction). This Induction was, I think, greatly 
 altered by Shakespeare in 1608.' 
 
 It is not Fleay's happiest piece of work. There is really 
 something to be said for the Lodge theory ; but Fleay does 
 not say it. In his Manual, however, where he puts the 
 unsupported theory that Shakespeare and Marlowe wrote 
 A Shbbw, and that Lodge rewrote Marlowe's part in 
 1601-2 (!), he shows that among the many irregular lines of 
 the play are a large number in which one syllable constitutes 
 the first foot. This type of line was instituted by Marlowe, 
 and Lodge frequently has it in his Wounds op Civil Wab. 
 But this is a slender basis for an attribution, and much 
 more is required to get the hypothesis a hearing. Chapman, 
 to name no other, has plenty of irregular lines, in all 
 conscience, and some of the type in question. All that is 
 made clear by the multitude of irregular lines is that, as 
 Fleay insists, the bulk of the work is not Shakespeare's. 
 
 ' Life amS, Work of Bhake$pewre, pp. 124-7. 
 
228 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Nothing, finally, is done to justify the thesis that 
 Shakespeare worked on the Induction and the play as late 
 as 1603. Neither in the Induction nor in the Petruchio 
 scenes is the versification at all like that of Hamlet or 
 Mbastjbb fob Measure : it must be much earlier if it be 
 Shakespeare's at all. Nor can the allusion to Grissel, the 
 use of the word " curst" in II. i. 187, and the phrase "to 
 kill a wife with kindness," warrant a date which will cover 
 Heywood's play. The title of that, as Fieay afterwards 
 recognized, is a proverbial phrase ; " patient Grissel " is in 
 the same case ; and " curst " is no more allusive in II. i. 
 187 than in I. i. 185 and I. ii. 70, 89, 180, or elsewhere. 
 As a matter of fact we have the " killed with kindness " tag 
 in Greene's Mamillia (1580-83) : 
 
 Eilled her with kindnesg (Works, ii. 26) ; 
 
 and in Munday's Downfall of Egbert Babl of 
 Huntington (III. i. : ed. Collier, p. 54) printed in 1598 : 
 
 Tuok. I will be kind. 
 
 Jermy. Will not yonr kindness kill her 1 
 
 And there seems to have been, as Professor Bond points out, 
 a " Patient Grisel " tract in circulation before 1590, to say 
 nothing of the lately recovered old play on the theme by 
 John Phillip. The breakdown of all these grounds leaves 
 us free to seek better tests. 
 
 That Chapman could have had a hand in the Shrew has 
 probably never occurred to any one ; and it is solely by 
 primary induction from word-clues in TiMON that I have 
 been led to think it possible. These clues are : 
 
 1. The transitive use of cease, which occurs only in Timon, 
 Ctmbelinb, and the Shrew in the Shakespeare 
 concordance, and which we have seen to be common 
 in Chapman. 
 
"THE TAMING OP THE SHREW" 229 
 
 2. The word ewer, found only in Timon and The Shbew 
 
 in all the plays, and also occurring in Chapman, 
 Ist Odyssey, 222 ; 7th Odyssey, 243 ; 15th Odyssey, 
 175 ; 18th Odyssey, 566, 567 ; Byron's Conspieaoy, 
 V. ii. 182. In the last-cited passage we have 
 " basins and ewers," as in the Induction, II. i. 350. 
 
 These do not carry us far ; but there are others : 
 
 3. Plash (I. i. 23) occurs only in the Sheew in the 
 
 Shakespeare plays. It is found in Chapman, Htmn 
 TO Christ: Poems, p. 145a. 
 
 4. Deck is abnormally used in I. i. 16 : " To deck his 
 
 fortune with his virtuous deeds." Compare : 
 
 As great princes, well-inform'd and deeVd 
 With gracious virtue. 
 
 Epist. Ded. to Frinoe Henry. 
 
 Jove's daughter, deok'd with the mellifluous tongue. 
 
 Trans, of Horn. Hymn to the Moon. 
 
 5. Satiety (I. i. 24) occurs only in the Shrew, Timon, and 
 
 Othello. It is very common in Chapman. 
 
 6. Ingenious (I. i. 9: "A course of learning and ingenious 
 
 studies ") is, as we have seen, a common word of 
 Chapman's. It would have no significance apart 
 from other clues, seeing that Shakespeare uses the 
 word in several plays ; but the Act in which it occurs 
 is pronounced by Fleay not Shakespeare's, and is not 
 likely to be claimed for him by any one who recog- 
 nizes another hand in the play. And it is one of 
 four favourite words of Chapman in the opening 
 speech. 
 
 7. Institute (I. i. 8) occurs only in the Shrew and in the 
 
 non- Shakespearean 1 Henry VI. It is found in 
 Chapman, 24th Odyssey, 123, and elsewhere : 
 
 Where many a fore-studied exercise 
 Was instituted. 
 
 Trans, of Oeorgict of Hetiod : Poems, p. 2206. 
 
230 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 8. Stoics (I. i, 31) occurs only in the Shrew. It is found 
 
 in Chapman, Eugenia : Poems, p. 331a, and 
 elsewhere. 
 
 9. Stocks, as here used, is also special to this play. 
 
 Chapman has the word in the Blind Beggab, 
 near end. 
 10-11. Mathematics and metaphysics (I. i. 37), being 
 required words, are not so significant as others. 
 But it should be noted that they occur only in the 
 Shbew. The Latin and Italian phrases, of which 
 there are many, are among the data which have led 
 so many critics to doubt Shakespeare's authorship; 
 and the scholastic terms point in the same direction. 
 
 12. Perpetually (II. i. 142), found, as above noted, ,in 
 
 Pekioles and All's Well, occurs several times 
 in Chapman ; and we shall see that in All's Well, 
 as in Pericles, it is probably non- Shakespearean. 
 
 13. Counterpoints (II. i. 353). Occurs only in the Sheew. 
 
 14. Pedascule (III. i. 50). Occurs only in the Shbew. 
 
 15. Gamut, which occurs four times in the same scene, is 
 
 found only in the Shbew. It is of course a required 
 word. 
 
 16. Studs (III. ii. 63) is found only in the Shrew. It 
 
 occurs in Chapman, 1st Iliad, 244; 7th Iliad, 262; 
 11th Iliad, 549 ; 14th Iliad, 154. 
 
 17. Eyesore (III. ii. 103) comes only in the Shrew and in 
 
 LucBECE. It occurs in Chapman, 17th Odyssey, 525. 
 
 18. Cuff (noun and verb) occurs twice in the Shbew, once 
 
 in the non-Shakespearean 1 Henet VI, and once in 
 Hamlet. It occurs dozens of times in Chapman. 
 
 19. Incredible (II. i. 308) is found nowhere else in the 
 
 Shakespeare plays. Chapman has the word in his 
 Commentarius on the second Iliad; in Byron's 
 Tbagedx, V. ii. 103 ; and elsewhere. 
 
 20. Ceremonial (III. ii. 6) also occurs only in the Shbew. 
 
 Chapman has unceremonious, and very often ceremony. 
 
"THE TAMING OF THE SHREW" 231 
 
 21. Budesby (III. ii. 10) occurs only in the Shrew and in 
 
 Twelfth Night. As Fleay notes, it is found as a 
 name in Sib Giles Goosecap, which is now defi- 
 nitely assigned to Chapman, on Fleay's original 
 suggestion. 
 
 22. Armoury (III. ii. 47) occurs only in the Shrew and in 
 
 Titus Andronious. It is found in Chapman, Ist 
 Odyssey, 202 ; 19th Odyssey, 14 ; 22nd Odyssey, 176, 
 190 ; Monsieur D'Olive, I. i. 28 ; 5th Iliad, 218. 
 
 23. Chine (III. ii. 51), found in 2 Henrt VI and 
 
 Henry VIII, occurs frequently in Chapman's 
 Homer. 
 
 24. Begnawn (III. ii. 55) is one of several other words in the 
 
 same speech that are not found elsewhere in Shake- 
 speare. Chapman has gnawn in the 19th Ihad, 54. 
 This occurs in the Merry Wives, II. ii. 307. We 
 have gnawed in the Errors, V. i. 289, and in 
 ElCHARD III, I. iv. 25. 
 
 25. Mad-brain (HI. ii. 10) ; and mad-brained (III. ii. 165) 
 
 are non- Shakespearean. The first occurs only in the 
 Shrew ; the second only in a Chapman line in 
 TiMON and in 1 Henry VI. The first is found 
 thrice in Chapman's Blind Beggar of Alexandria. 
 Cuff also comes in III. ii. 10. 
 
 26. Hungerly (III. ii. 177) occurs only in the Shrew, 
 
 TiMON, and Othello. 
 
 27. Junkets (III. ii. 250) occurs in no other Shakespearean 
 
 play. It is found thrice in Chapman — Frogs and 
 Mice : Poems, p. 2726 ; 6th Odyssey, 106 ; Byron's 
 Conspiracy, II. ii. 6. 
 
 28. Unexperienced (IV. i. 86) is found only in the Shrew. 
 
 It occurs in Chapman's part of Hero and Leander 
 (iii. 7). 
 
 29. Incomparable (IV. ii. 98) occurs in Timon, 3 Henry VI, 
 
 and Henry VIII. Chapman has the word in the 
 preface to his translation of Musseus ; Efioedium : 
 
232 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Poems, p. 1666; title of short poem appended 
 thereto : and pref. to the Iliads. 
 
 30. Buffling (IV. iii. 60) occurs only in the Shebw. 
 
 Chapman has ruffle (vb.) in The Gentleman Ushbe 
 (II. i. 251). The noun, it will be remembered, 
 occurs in the Complaint, with a similar force. 
 
 31. Pittance (IV. iv. 61) occurs only in the Shbew. 
 
 Chapman has the word in the 11th Iliad, 547, and in 
 BtrssY D'Ambois, II. i. 15. 
 
 32. Parsley (IV. iv. 101) comes only in the Sheew. 
 
 Chapman has it in the 2nd Iliad, 688. 
 
 To this list of clues, pointing mostly to Chapman, 
 should be added two which connect the Sheew with Titxjs 
 Andeonicus. In that play (V. ii. 66) occurs the phrase, 
 " miserable, mad, mistaking eyes " ; and in the Shebw 
 (IV. V. 45, 50) we have "mistaking eyes" and "mad 
 mistaking." Again, " custard-coffin " (IV. iii. 82) is one of 
 the once-used terms in the Sheew ; and in TiTUS (V. ii. 
 189) we have the only other use of " coffin," in the culinary 
 sense, in the plays. When studying the problem of TiTUS, 
 I considered that these coincidences might point to Lodge's 
 connection with both plays, on the assumption that Fleay 
 was right in associating Lodge with the Sheew. But, 
 slender as they are, the two clues should be reconsidered 
 with a view to the possibility that Chapman may have 
 had some share in the final patching of Titxjs, which 
 has a noticeable number of once-used words found in 
 his work. 
 
 Turning back now to the Induction, we find there these 
 further clues : 
 
 33. Transmutation (ii. 22) occurs only in this play. It 
 
 is found in Chapman : Eugenia : Peems, p. 332a. 
 
 34. Contain (= restrain) i. 100. This word is nearly always 
 
 used by Shakespeare in the modern sense of " en- 
 
"THE TAMING OF THE SHREW" 233 
 
 close." In Chapman it is often found in the sense 
 of "restrain." 
 
 35. Studded (ii. 44) occurs only in the Shbbw. Chapman 
 
 has " silver-studded sword " in his first version of the 
 second Iliad, 43 ; and " golden-studded " in the 
 Hymn to Venus : Poems, p. 305a. 
 
 36. Basin, v^hich occurs twice in the Induction, is found 
 
 only in Titus and Timon among the other plays. 
 Chapman has it, as ahove noted. 
 
 37. Workmanly (ii. 62) occurs only here in the plays. It 
 
 may be compared with his use of artly, lawyerly, 
 and of workmanship. 
 
 As the foregoing have been noted upon a single search, 
 there are doubtless many other once-used words in the play : 
 indeed I learn from Professor Bond's introduction to his 
 edition in the " Arden " series that Mr. Marshall found 142, 
 reducible to 115. But those will include the Latin and 
 Italian words, which need not detain us. On the other 
 hand, I would respectfully demur to Professor Bond's 
 acceptance of the old thesis of Simpson as to the significance 
 or non-significance of all once-used words, no less than to 
 his assumption that Shakespeare's share in the play has 
 been satisfactorily assigned. He writes : 
 
 Mr. R. Simpson's table (N. Sh. 800. Trans., 1874, p. 115) showed that 
 the proportion of iVa? Xeyo/itva in Henry V(i. in 6), Love's Labott/r'g Loet 
 (1 in 7i), Macbeth (1 in 8), and many other plays, was far larger ; and 
 examination of Mr. Marshall's list shows that 68 of the 115 occur in the 
 undoubted portion (1064 lines), and only 47 in the much larger suspected 
 portion (1449 lines) — while, so far as I can find, only 4 in the former 
 and 2 in the latter are acquired from A Shrew — inviting the conclusion, 
 always probable with an author of the largest vocabulary known, that a 
 high percentage of once-used words is argument rather for than against 
 Shakespeare's authorship.' 
 
 I shall have something to say later on the size of Shake- 
 speare's vocabulary, merely demurring here to any pre- 
 
 ' Introduction cited, p. zxzvi. 
 
234 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 supposition based on its supposed superiority. But as to 
 once-used words, the argument of Simpson is merely a 
 darkening of counsel. For one thing, nobody has ever 
 checked his count. But he himself admitted that his lists 
 
 are not of much critical value, because Mrs. Clarke counts all forms of a 
 word as so many different words, while, on the other hand, she counts 
 all words spelt alike as one word. Thus " see, seeth, seen," are three 
 words ; saw, the perfect of see, and «aw, the carpenter's tool, are but one 
 word. . . . But such as they are, the hsts necessarily give an approxi- 
 mate idea of the relative number of Uiral Xtyoiiiva in each of the Shake- 
 spearean plays. The result is, on the whole, that it is not the doubtful 
 plays, those written partly by Shakespeare, partly by other hands, 
 which are richest in these rarities. And the remarkable consequence is, 
 that if we take as the truest Shakespearean diction the word-Ust which 
 is common to all the plays, then the false Shakespeare is much more 
 Shakespearean than the true. In his exceptional vocabulary Shake- 
 speare is much more like himself than bis imitators or rivals are like 
 him. Thus if we take Shakespeare's part of Hekby VIII we shall find it 
 has twice more of these once-used words than Fletcher's part ; so it is 
 in Pericles, in spite of the archaisms of the Gower choruses. 
 
 Premising that the proposition as to HsNBY VIII may be 
 found to point to a third hand in the drafting of that, as we 
 have seen to be the case in Pbbioles, we have here to note 
 that the once-used words counted by Simpson not only 
 include, as he avows, all the flections of any verb ; they 
 include also all the names of persons and places special 
 to each play; and all the dialect-forms, as the "Welsh 
 pronunciations in the Mbert Wives and Henby V, and 
 all the French in both plays, as well as the French 
 pronunciations of English ! The result is that his totals are 
 substantially non-significant. Their effect is simply to 
 cancel the just impression of a play's vocabulary, since the 
 Mebrt Wives figures as having 352 special words in 3099, 
 or about 1 in 9, while Julius Csisab has only 146 in 2440, 
 or about 1 in 17. Of real range of vocabulary, therefore, 
 the indiscriminate statistical method gives no notion. 
 And Simpson himself, while advancing the misleading 
 generalizations above cited, not only avows that his lists 
 
"THE TAMING OF THE SHREW" 235 
 
 have small critical value, but adds : " I do not question the 
 use which may still be made of crucial words to determine 
 what is and is not Shakespearean. Such words are to be 
 weighed, not counted." 
 
 Precisely so ; and it is to more or less significant uses of 
 words that I have appealed throughout this investigation. 
 I have avowed that a number even of those given carry 
 with them little presumption of authorship ; and, seeing 
 that all the plays have some once-used words, I recognize 
 that a number of these may be Shakespeare's even when he 
 is perhaps rewriting another man's matter. But I submit 
 that all the orders of evidence must be weighed and com- 
 pared ; and that it is extremely precarious to take for 
 granted what is Shakespeare's original work in any disputed 
 play. Even if the proportions of significant specialties 
 in the plays be supposed to work out much the same as the 
 proportions of all once-used words including dialect-forms, 
 flections, foreign words, and names — a thing wholly un- 
 proved — assumptions as to origination may still be quite 
 misleading. What if, for instance, the Shakespeare parts 
 of Heney VIII be recasts of a draft by Chapman ? What 
 if the " undisputed " Love's Laboub's Lost and Hbnby V 
 really contain a quantity of non-Shakespearean raw 
 material ? 
 
 As regards the Shbbw, in which Professor Bond finds a 
 great deal more of Shakespearean matter than I can, I am 
 content to leave the case for the present as it is above set 
 forth, being concerned only to show that there are grounds 
 for supposing Chapman to have had a share in the play, and 
 offering no confident theory of the stage or extent of his 
 intervention. The play probably underwent several 
 manipulations ; and long ago, without rejecting Eleay's 
 theory as to Lodge, I surmised, on grounds of phrase and 
 vocabulary, that Greene had a hand in it.' That I still 
 think probable. He may have shared in A Shbbw, and 
 
 ' See Did Shakeipea/re write " Titut Andronicui " ? 1905, pp. 182-8. 
 
236 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 later recast it as Tee Shbew. The apparent clues to him 
 are numerous, and collectively weighty ; and as he died in 
 1592 there is ample time-room for a later recast by 
 Chapman. 
 
 The double problem of A Shbew and The Sheew 
 remains elastic for any investigator ; and Professor Bond's 
 scholarly introduction indicates all the data. In the old 
 play there are some textual reproductions and a number 
 of obvious imitations of Marlowe ; and Fleay, after 
 surmising that Marlowe and Shakespeare wrote the play 
 between them, assigned it to Kyd, one of Marlowe's 
 imitators, on the speculative ground of a passage in 
 Greene's Menaphon, in which a line of A Shbew: 
 
 Or icy hair that grows on Boreas' ohin, 
 
 slightly altered, is put in the mouth of Doron, who is 
 held accordingly to be the representative of the "idiot art- 
 masters " satirized by Nashe in the preface, with special 
 reference to Kyd. It is certain that Nashe's main attack 
 was upon Kyd ; but Fleay's conclusion that there cannot 
 be "any doubt that Doron is Kyd" has never seemed 
 to me to be in any way substantiated. Professor Bond 
 justifiably pronounces the theory " thin, to the point of 
 emaciation." In his Manual (pp. 291-4) Fleay was 
 quite satisfied that Doron was Lodge ; and Simpson, who 
 first noted the citation in Menaphon, thought Doron 
 was meant for Shakespeare ! Seeing that Menaphon was 
 entered for publication in 1589, we can readily agree 
 with Fleay that Shakespeare is excluded; but if the 
 hypothesis were put that Greene wrote A Shbew, and 
 that in Menaphon he was echoing himself, it would be 
 hard to find any decisive rebuttal. The line in A Shbew 
 might be a harmless parody of a passage in Lodge's 
 Wounds op Civil Wab : ' 
 
 ' This would square with Fleay's first theory, that Doron was 
 Lodge. 
 
"THE TAMING OP THE SHREW" 237 
 
 These looks that for their reverend white 
 Snrpass the down on jEsoulapius' ohin," 
 
 as that play is by Fleay himself dated 1587. The whole- 
 sale quotation and imitation of Marlowe might have 
 been done by Greene ; = to whom, so far as clues of 
 style and word go, I should more readily assign the play 
 than to Kyd ; and indeed it is not quite certain that 
 Marlowe himself had no hand in it, though we have 
 small ground for thinking he could or would write a 
 comedy. In any case, there has intervened between the 
 old play and Shakespeare a third and probably a fourth 
 hand, to whose work Shakespeare has added very little. 
 Such a speech as Petruchio's " Think you a little din 
 can daunt mine ears?" (I. ii. 200-11) may be his ; but 
 if so, it is quite early work. Petruchio's later speech, 
 II. i. 169-82, which slightly suggests him, contains a line : 
 
 As morning roaeu newly washed with dew, 
 
 which is a frank adaptation of 
 
 As glorious as the morning washed with dew, 
 
 in Scene x of the old play; and one suspects the hand 
 of Greene in both. But though Greene may have recast 
 the old play — whether his or another's — shortly before 
 his death, there is still strong ground for the surmise 
 that Chapman developed it further, at an early stage of 
 his play-making career ; and unless there can be found 
 new evidence for Lodge, it would stand in the main to 
 Chapman's account. Lodge indeed may have collaborated 
 with Greene on the play before Chapman touched it. 
 
 On this view, Chapman had done vamping-work, as 
 might have been expected, before' 1596, when he is com- 
 monly assumed to have begun to write for the stage 
 
 ' Malone Soo. rep., lines 1865-66. 
 
 ' Malone suggested Peele or Greene ; Knight decided confidently for 
 Greene. 
 
238 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 with his Blind Beggar. Fleay, who puts this view, is 
 satisfied that Chapman came to town in 1593. How 
 then did he maintain himself? That he adapted or 
 patched plays before he originated any is at least as 
 natural an inference in his case as in Shakespeare's. 
 For the rest, the style of the admittedly non-Shake- 
 spearean parts of the Shrew is quite comparable with 
 that of Chapman's comedies, which is as simple as his 
 later tragic style is turgid and involved. 
 
§6. THE "HENRY VI" TRILOGY 
 
 OuB survey of the problematic possibilities would not be 
 even approximately complete if we did not consider the 
 chance that Chapman, assuming him to have been play- 
 patching as early as 1593 or 1594, may have had a hand in 
 working up the Henby VI plays. Before recognizing 
 Chapman's association with Shakespeare, I had been at 
 considerable pains to ascertain who did the revision work, 
 on the bases laid by Marlowe, Greene, and Peele, being 
 satisfied that only here and there did Shakespeare's hand 
 enter, and perhaps only in Part II. Without going into 
 detail I may say that only in Part I do I see many signs of 
 Chapman ; but that there are there signs enough to call for 
 inquiry. 
 
 In facing the issue, it has to be remembered that 
 Chapman's early "heroic " blank- verse manner, as indicated 
 in parts of the Blind Beggab op AiiEXANDBiA, is distinctly 
 that of the pre-Shakespeareans, and not at all that of 
 his tragedies, which were written after he had formed his 
 own dramatic style. As Professor Parrott reasonably infers, 
 there was probably a good deal of Marlowese verse in the 
 play as written ; much having evidently been excised, at 
 heavy cost to the plot, to give time for the comic matter 
 which made the piece popular. That he should write in 
 the Marlowe manner if he took part in 1 Henby VI, then, 
 is what is to be expected. 
 
 That Marlowe began that play as it stands may now, 
 perhaps, be taken for granted, though Mr. Hart, in his 
 scholarly and valuable edition, in the " Arden" series, saw fit 
 
240 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 to rank the Marlowesque matter as early imitative work by 
 Shakespeare. That G-reene had a share is not only admitted 
 by Mr. Hart, but proved by him in detail, by many notable 
 verbal clues ; to which I may add the item that the scansion 
 "mi/intain," in I. i. 71, is found in Greene and not in 
 Marlowe. Difficulty begins with the entry of the third 
 messenger, where the style seems to sink ; and here it may 
 be that Chapman enters. The word " enrank," here found 
 for the first time, is one used by him (3rd Iliad, 338) ; and 
 " enacted," which in the Mebohant of Venice (IV. i. 848) 
 has the legal meaning, is here and in two other places in 
 this play used with Chapman's force of " acted." But it is 
 in the second scene that the problem becomes most 
 interesting. The lines : 
 
 Man his tirne moTing, avan aa In the heavani, 
 So in the earth, to this day is not known, 
 
 would by their style suggest Marlowe. As Steevens noted, 
 Nashe put the same point in one of his prefaces ; but the 
 versification before us cannot be his ; and he probably got 
 his knowledge from this play, to which he expressly alludes. 
 The writer, whoever he was, may in turn have got it from 
 Scot's DiscovBBiE OP WiTOHOBAFT, 1684.' But, as 
 Mr. Hart notes, the form " Mars his " occurs several times 
 in Tboilus and Ceessida, whereas in the Tempest and 
 Hamlet we have " Mars's." Now, Chapman, whom we 
 have seen reason to connect with Tboilus, knew something 
 about the problem of Mars's motions in connection with the 
 Homeridian Hymn to Ares, where he calls the God : 
 
 To heaven's fiery sphere 
 Giver of circular moti6n, between 
 That and the Pleiads that still wandering been, 
 Where thy still-vehemently-flaming horse 
 About the third heaven make their fiery course 
 
 " " The true motion of Mars is not yet perceived," B, II., Ch. xxi. 
 p. 168. Nicholson's rep. p. 168, 
 
THE "HENRY VI" TRILOGY 241 
 
 — a rendering that rather minimizes the force of the 
 original, which says that the steeds carry the God " above 
 the third orbit." In Sib Giles Goosecap, further, we 
 have the Unas (II. i. 5-6) : 
 
 How to distinguish all the moti6ua 
 Of the celestial bodies, 
 
 in a passage in which the speaker professes to have studied 
 astronomy. When, then, in the same scene-section of 
 1 Heney VI we find the epithet " mad-brain'd," which we 
 have already seen some reason to trace to Chapman, our 
 suspicion of his presence is somewhat strengthened, though 
 not, of course, established. The work may still be 
 Marlowe's. But a little further on still we find Chapman's 
 frequent word " audacity," which occurs only here and in 
 Cymbeline in the Shakespeare plays. So the suspicion 
 persists. 
 
 " Gimmors," in line 41, is shown by Mr. Hart to be 
 probably a word of Greene's ; but he gives an instance 
 from Dekker (with Greene's spelling, gimmals) which, as 
 he remarks, is so exactly to the point as to make Dekker 
 " somewhat suspect " in the matter. Seeing that Dekker's 
 passage was penned long after the play, however, it may 
 well be an echo of that ; and Greene's share in the play is 
 indicated at many other points. But in the Pucelle's 
 speech beginning at line 65, though the verse is of a quite 
 early end-stopped sort, there are touches which suggest 
 Chapman, notably the line : 
 
 With those clear raya which she infused on me, 
 
 which point to so much of his language about light and 
 vision, noted in the first section of this inquiry. Passing 
 over some minor verbal clues, some of which still point 
 to Greene, we have considerable reason to suspect 
 Chapman's hand in the passage (133-5) : 
 
 16 
 
242 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Glory is like a circle in the water, 
 
 Which never ceaseth to enlarge itself 
 
 Till by broad spreading it disperse to naught. 
 
 The old variorum editors noted instances of this thought in 
 Davies's Nosce Teipsum, Harrington's Orlando Purioso, 
 Chapman's Epistle Dedicatory to his translation of the 
 Iliad, and elsewhere ; and Mr. Hart, whose diligence in 
 collation was above all praise, noted the earlier instance of 
 it in Ovid's Banquet of Sense : 
 
 And as, a pebble cast into a spring, 
 We see a sort of trembling circles rise. 
 One forming other in their issuing, 
 Till over all the fount they ciroulize; 
 So . . . 
 
 Now, as the passage in the Epistle Dedicatory is to the 
 same effect, it is reasonable to ask whether in the play we 
 have not Chapman using one of his favourite tags. 
 There is only a moderate presumption, but it counts ; and 
 when in the next scene, which is more in Marlowe's 
 manner than in Greene's, we find (1) Chapman's tic-word 
 "cuff"; and (2) his word " contumeliously," it is difficult 
 to get rid of the suspicion that the hand is his, though 
 he may be adapting older matter. 
 
 It is hard to assign Scene iv, in which the Master 
 Gunner so absurdly informs his own son of his identity; 
 but in line 39 we have Chapman's " contumelious " ; and 
 " linstock " (after line 56) is a word of his, as Mr. Hart 
 notes. When we come to Scene v, in which we find 
 six double-endings in the first twelve lines, the natural 
 surmise is that we are reading either Chapman or 
 Heywood, who seem to have been the first practitioners 
 capable of that indulgence. And it seems very possible 
 that the relatively accurate reference to " Adonis' gardens," 
 in Scene vi, which the believers in Shakespeare's classical 
 scholarship take as a proof of his learning, is insert-ed 
 
THE "HENRY VI" TRILOGY 243 
 
 by Chapman. Spenser, Jonson, Harvey, and Milton all 
 speak of the garden or gardens of Adonis as spacious and 
 splendid, whereas the phrase, as Bentley pointed out, 
 referred to the trays of herbs prepared for the Adonis 
 festival — an interesting case of " sympathetic magic " in 
 the ancient world. But the phrase was really proverbial, 
 and though scholars like Spenser and Jonson, followed 
 by Milton, misunderstood it. Chapman might have 
 known better. Marlowe or Greene, however, may have 
 known the proverb in the Latin ; and as Chapman never 
 uses it elsewhere we have no special ground for assigning 
 it to him. I He does not appear to have done more than 
 revise and interpolate the work of the Marlowe group.^ 
 
 The chief scenes in the play, which alone have seemed 
 to critics like Fleay Shakespearean, are the quarrel of the 
 roses in the Temple Garden and the Talbot scenes in 
 Act IV, which according to Nashe were making a special 
 sensation in 1592. Fleay assigned both to Shakespeare; 
 but, probably realizing that the high percentage of double- 
 endings in the Eoses scene made that quite impossible for 
 Shakespeare as early as 1594, afterwards treated it as a 
 later addition. Mr. Hart, who did not attend to metrical 
 tests, rejected this solution, but, I think, on wrong grounds. 
 The scene is, I believe, really by Marlowe, who in his 
 translation of the first book of Lucan reached the propor- 
 tion of 17 per cent. The style is not Shakespeare's, early 
 or late, and the only alternative claimant seems to be 
 Chapman,3 on the score of his early resort to the double- 
 
 ' The closing speech in the scene appears to be Greene's. 
 
 = The phrase "his own arm's fortitude" in II. i. 17, raises the 
 question of Chapman's possible share in Edward III, where the word is 
 nsed (III. iii. 182) with that force. Chapman very often uses " fortitude," 
 generally in its modern sense, but sometimes with the old sense of 
 " strength." But though the Marlowe group do not use the word in 
 their signed work, one of theni may have done so, once in a way. Other 
 clues in both passages point to Greene. 
 
 3 Heywood, whose Foue Pkkntisbs of London may reasonably be 
 dated about 1594 (see Fleay, Biog. Ch/ron. i. 282), does show there some 
 
244 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 ending. But I cannot pretend to find either his style or his 
 vocabulary in the scene, beyond the use of his tic-word 
 " exempt," which was in fairly common use, and was 
 employed by other playwrights, though by none so fre- 
 quently as by him. The next scene, though it is archaic, 
 might be his, but not this. 
 
 The Talbot scenes in Act IV I have always found 
 puzzling, being unable to suppose them Shakespeare's or to 
 trace them clearly to any one else. Such verbal clues as 
 " Icarus," " mickle," "well I wot," and " giglot " all point 
 apparently to Greene ; but neither the blank nor the 
 rhymed verse seems to have Greene's movement. The 
 rhymed matter suggests Dekker, of whom, however, we 
 have no trace so early as 1592, though Fleay thinks he was 
 at work as early as 1588. It seems barely possible that, as 
 it stands, it is Greene rewritten by Chapman. He never 
 uses " mickle," or " well I wot," but he once has " giglot " 
 (Peg Vbee) ; and " guardant," which for Mr. Hart is 
 genuine Shakespeare, being found in CoElOLANUS, suggests 
 to me Chapman's "guardiance" (22nd Ihad, 436), and 
 Heywood's "guardiants" (Eapb of Lucbeob, V. i.). On 
 the other hand, it is not impossible that Marlowe, who had 
 taken to rhymed couplets in Heeo and Lbandeb, may 
 have chosen to employ them in added scenes of this play. 
 
 Beyond this one does not seem entitled to go. In the 
 first scene of Act V we have " immanity," which occurs 
 twice in Chapman, and never in any of the dramatists of 
 the Marlowe group — another reason for surmising that 
 he revised the play ; but the Suffolk and Margaret scene is, 
 I think, clearly Greene's. Whether Chapman revised 2 
 and 3 Heney VI is a problem that would unduly lengthen 
 this inquiry, with no great prospect of a clear result ; and 
 concerning Eichaed III, which equally had a reviser 
 
 touch of the style of the Eoaes scene, notably in the speeohes of Guy to 
 the Lady of France, in what appears to be the Second Act (Pearson's 
 Heywood, vol ii. pp. 179-81). But there are few double-endings ; and 
 Heywood seems to be here under the influeaoe of MarIow«. 
 
THE "HENRY VI" TRILOGY 245 
 
 between Marlowe and Shakespeare, I will merely note that 
 
 one of the most distinct verbal clues to him is in a scene 
 
 which no one would dream of assigning to him on its 
 
 merits. 
 
 In the dream-parade of ghosts in the tents of Richard 
 
 and Richmond, the spirit of Henry VI remarks to the 
 
 former : 
 
 When I was mortal, my anointed body 
 By thee was puaohSd full of deadly holes. 
 
 Many people are still content to believe that that was 
 
 written by Shakespeare, though Mr. A. H. Thompson, 
 
 in his excellent " Arden " edition of Richabd III, visibly 
 
 leans to Fleay's view that the play is primarily Marlowe's. 
 
 Not even to Marlowe, however, can any considerate critic 
 
 readily assign the Ghosts. Seeing that Kyd was an early 
 
 monopolist of these figures, and remembering the opening 
 
 lines of the Induction to The Spanish Teagedy, one is 
 
 inclined to credit the spectres to him. But neither in Kyd 
 
 nor in any of the pre-Shakespeareans does one find the 
 
 word "punch." The only Elizabethan dramatist in whose 
 
 work I have found it is — Chapman ! It is in his 6th Iliad, 
 
 126: 
 
 With a goad he punoht each furious dame, 
 And made them every one cast down their green and leavy spears : 
 This th' homicide Lycurgus did. 
 
 After all, the man who penned this line could have penned 
 the other. He uses all the three forms, pinch, paunch, and 
 punch, whereas Kyd has only paunch. Were it not that 
 there are other clues to Chapman in Richaed III, some 
 of them indicated in the course of our inquiry, one would 
 not raise the question, especially seeing that the " despair 
 and die" business echoes Faustus. But the problem is 
 very intricate, and calls for separate and detailed treatment. 
 I will therefore conclude this survey by advancing one or 
 two critical heresies of a somewhat advanced order, which 
 will probably be slow to find friends. 
 
§7. "HENRY V" 
 
 Feom almost my earliest reading I have suspected' that most 
 if not all of the prologues to Heney V, and a number of 
 the speeches, including the Harfleur rants, are not Shake- 
 speare's. Later study has convinced me that the play is 
 really a recast of a pre- Shakespearean drama, apparently 
 by Marlowe and Greene, of whose phraseology, as embodied 
 in both Edwaed II and Edwaed III, there are plain 
 survivals in this. It is admittedly, in respect of its 
 opening, a companion play to Edwaed III, the initiation 
 of which it closely copies or preludes ; ' and only those 
 who persist in assigning the latter play to Shakespeare will 
 be likely to deny that the academic group who put in drama 
 the three Edwards, and such unattractive kings as John 
 and Henry VI and Richard III, were likely to leave un- 
 touched so enticing a theme as the hero-king, the victor 
 of Agincourt. The old play of Tarleton, The Famous 
 ViCTOEiBS OF Hbnet V, was as inadequate to its theme 
 as the old Teue Tbagedie of Richaed III, and was as 
 certain to be superseded. It could not have been left in 
 full possession of the field till 1599. What concerns us 
 here, however, is not the earlier but the later history of the 
 play. That it was produced pretty much as it now stands 
 by Shakespeare's company in 1599 is certain ; and there is 
 unquestionably some of Shakespeare's work in it. The 
 
 ■ There are several reasons for thinking ithat the interim Hbney V 
 may be the earlier play of the two. 
 
 M6 
 
"HENRY V" 247 
 
 versification of Henry's soliloquy (possibly not the matter) 
 is as clearly his as that of the Harfleur rants is not. But 
 who wrote the prologues, to begin with? 
 
 Those who recognize that the prologue to TEOlLtrs is not 
 Shakespearean are far committed, if they will consider 
 closely, to the conclusion that the Henet V prologues are 
 in the same negative category. They date, as they stand, 
 from about the same year, and they have the same general 
 aspect. I had made many attempts to trace their author- 
 ship, finding in one or two apparent marks of Peele, and in 
 others the style of Marlowe, but recognizing always that 
 they showed affinities to one or two of the prologues of 
 Dekker (who, we know from Henslowe's Diary, did an 
 occasional prologue for an existing play) as well as to the 
 Teoilus prologue. But the inquiry into Chapman's author- 
 ship of the Complaint opened up new contingencies. First 
 we have the word " threaden," in the Complaint, repro- 
 duced in the Chorus to Act III, which begins with a tag of 
 Chapman's : 
 
 In motion of no less celerity 
 Than that of thought. 
 
 " Streamers" is a word of Marlowe's and Peele's, but it is 
 also used by Chapman (9th Iliad, 237). " Kivage " is 
 apparently taken from Hall's Chronicle (ed. 1550 : Henry V, 
 5 verso, 21 recto), which furnishes several of the once-used 
 words of this play ; but " sternage " suggests the " stonage " 
 of Chapman's translation of Hesiod's Georgics (ii), where it 
 is used in connection with the winter housing of a ship. 
 " Linstock," as we have noted, is also a word of his. 
 And the line : 
 
 Draw the huge bottoms through the furrow'd sea, 
 
 suggests the " deep-drawing barks " of the Tbgilxjs prologue.' 
 Even the "he whose chin is but enrich'd With one 
 
 ' On the other hand, we must keep in view the possibility that 
 the Tboilus prologue is late. Still, it may be from the same hand, 
 
248 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 appearing hair," points to a tic of the Complaint and 
 Hbbo and Leandee. 
 
 Turning to the first prologue, we find an apparent echo of 
 Peele in the lines : 
 
 Then should the warlike Harry, like himself 
 Assume the port of Mars, 
 
 which recalls his picture of Longshanks, who in Edwaed I, 
 Sc. i, 
 
 Like bloody-orested Mars o'erlooks his host. 
 
 But though " like himself " is a very weak pleonasm, 
 the verse of the prologue seems above Peele's plane, and 
 suggests Marlowe. And though the "crooked," meaning 
 "curved," in line 15, is an epithet constantly used by 
 Chapman, it is frequently used with the same force by his 
 predecessor, whom he so often imitates. On the other 
 hand, there are such marked resemblances of phrase and 
 idea between this and one or two of the other prologues to 
 those in Dekker's Old Foetunatus that we are bound 
 to ask whether Dekker was the imitator or the originator 
 of those in Hbney V. 
 
 That the surmised pre-Shakespearean play had prologues, 
 and that those of our play may be but adaptations of them, 
 is a possibility to be kept in view, to whatever hand we 
 may be finally disposed to assign them. The fifth, which is 
 commonly held to date the play decisively in 1599, referring 
 as it does to the Irish expedition of Essex in that year, may 
 quite well be a modification of an earlier prologue, in which 
 Essex or another may have been acclaimed on another occa- 
 sion. Peele wrote an Eclogue Gratulatory to Essex on his 
 return from Portugal in 1589 ; and in 1591 the same leader 
 was sent to France with a force in aid of Henri IV. When, 
 then, we compare the lines about the conquering Caesar's 
 welcome to Eome with Peele's in Edward I concerning 
 
 Ceesar, leading through the streets of Bome 
 The captive kings of conquered nations, 
 
"HENRY V" 249 
 
 we ask whether the prologue may not be primarily his. 
 But if there was adaptation there may have been recomposi- 
 tion ; and there are several word-clues to Chapman, notably 
 his frequent " ostent," and the word " whiffler," which, 
 occurring nowhere else in the Shakespeare plays, is found 
 four times in his signed works (Monsieur D'Olivb, III. ii. 
 167, 176 ; Widow's Teaes, II. iv. 104 ; Lines to Fletcher, 
 8). And undoubtedly the bulk of the prologue is much 
 more like Chapman than Peele. But the word " whiffler" 
 occurs in a stage direction of Sir Clyomon and SiB 
 Clamydes, ascribed (though disputedly) to Peele ; and we 
 are still left querying whether he were not the originator. 
 If there is one of the five which might be supposed to have 
 been rewritten by Shakespeare, it is the fourth, where the 
 proportion of double-endings is so noticeably small — only 
 two in 53 lines ; and there it is hard to believe that he is 
 the originator. But though 
 
 the cripple tardy-gaited night, 
 Who, like a foul and ugly witch, doth limp 
 So tediously away, 
 
 suggests Marlowe, as do some of the other prologues, the 
 
 vocabulary gives no very notable clues, and Dekker is about 
 
 as likely an alternative as Chapman, though some half a 
 
 dozen words suggest the latter. In the second prologue, 
 
 noting the lamentable pun on "gilt" and "guilt" as an 
 
 offence committed elsewhere by Chapman, we are reminded 
 
 that the same sin lies at Shakespeare's door in Macbeth, 
 
 unless it be there the work of the mangling Middleton, or 
 
 whoever else it was that mutilated that tragedy.' But this 
 
 prologue as a whole is distinctly archaic in style. 
 
 ' One of the spurious witch-scenes has word-clues to Chapman, as 
 affairs, contriver, vaporous, sleights. There are some also in the 
 spurious second scene, notably in the inversion in the first speech. 
 Cauld/ron, which occurs only in this play in Shakespeare, is a very 
 common word in Chapman; and "double double" is a phrase of his 
 (15th Iliad, 439). It is at least worth considering whether he, who 
 seems to have done so much patchwork for Shakespeare's company, had 
 a hand in the alteration of Macbeth, 
 
250 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Concerning the play in general, it must here suffice to 
 speak summarily. It is metrically anomalous in that its 
 proportion of double-endings is higher than that of Julius 
 C.E3AE, which is dated later ; and when we study it scene 
 by scene the anomaly is found to be heightened. The 
 visibly Shakespearean verse, such as the speech of 
 Canterbury on the honey-bees, and the soliloquy of Henry, 
 has few double-endings ; the first yielding only two in 
 38 lines, and the second 5 in 65 lines, three occurring in 
 respect of the word " ceremony." In the opening scene, 
 on the other hand, there are 23 in 97 lines ; in Act 11, 
 Scene ii, the percentage is over 29 ; in Scene iv, it is nearly 
 30; while in the two Harfleur rants it is 25 and 21-4.' 
 Throughout, apart from the two speeches specified, the 
 versification is markedly inferior to that of 1 Henry IV, 
 which is prior in date ; and the moral quahty of the rants 
 is as archaic as the diction. 
 
 That the Harfleur rants are third-rate Marlowe is sug- 
 gested alike by their diction, their purport, the psychological 
 affinity of the first (III. i.) to some of the writing in 
 2 Heney VI, and the moral af&nity of the second (III. iii.) 
 to much of Tamburlainb. Several clues of phrase and 
 once-used words in I. ii. again, point to both Edward II 
 and Edward III, no less than does the marked duplication 
 of the method of introduction to the latter play. So far, 
 most of the clues are to Marlowe, who can be clearly 
 traced in Edward III, though, as Greene is certainly 
 present there also, he may have been a collaborator in the 
 pre- Shakespearean Henry V. Elsewhere in the inferior 
 speeches there is reason to suspect the hand of Marlowe, 
 as in the lines (II. iv. 9-10) : 
 
 ' If it be urged here that in 2 Henry IV the percentages suddenly 
 rise after the third Act from 18 to 25, 23, and 28, 1 answer that for that 
 sudden increase there is needed some explanation. The style certainly 
 does not strengthen as compared with 1 Henry IY and Act I of Fart II. 
 This is another evaded problem. 
 
"HENRY V" 251 
 
 For England his approaches makes as fierce 
 As waters to the sucking of a gulf, 
 
 which, points to the " sucking shore " in the translation 
 of Ovid's Elegies, II. xi. 14. On the other hand, the 
 proportion of double-endings in this scene is exceptionally 
 high ; and though the second and third lines : 
 
 And more than carefully it us concerns 
 To answer royally in our defences, 
 
 noticeably echo two in Titus Andeonicus (IV. iii. 27-8) : 
 
 Therefore, my lord, it highly us concerns 
 By day and night to attend him carefully, 
 
 and thus support the inference of early workmanship, it is 
 as difficult to ascribe to the authors of Titus a scene with 
 30 per cent, of double-endings, as it is to suppose Shake- 
 speare attaining that proportion in 1599, in a scene so 
 immature and in parts so poorly written as that before 
 us. If there is an early substratum there has been a 
 revision by a writer who multiplies double-endings ; and 
 again the choice seems to lie between Chapman and 
 Heywood. As the latter might be supposed to be indi- 
 cated by the word "sonance" in IV. ii. 35, the hand 
 here might be his ; and it is only phrases like " womby 
 vaultages " that make me suspect that of Chapman. 
 "Vaulty" is one of his words; "womb" is one of his 
 common metaphors ; and the combination is very like 
 him. " Sonance," too, may possibly have been u?ed in 
 the early play; and the whole scene in which it occurs, 
 with its three double-endings to 68 lines, strongly suggests 
 Marlowe. Alike in respect of low and of high proportions 
 of double-endings in this play, we find ourselves faced by 
 non- Shakespearean work, and the problem is to trace the 
 early and the late hands. 
 
 It is in Act V, Scene ii, that Chapman is most clearly 
 suggested by the verbal clues. There, with 27 per cent. 
 
252 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 of double-endings, we have quite a cluster of once-used 
 words — congreeted, fumitory, coulter, savagery, kechsies, 
 burnet, as well as deracinate, which occurs only in 
 TBOiLtrs, and leas, occurring in Chapman and in the 
 dubious masque in the Tempest. Now, coulter is found 
 twice in Chapman's translation of Hesiod; and the 
 epithet " freckled " (line 49, found also in the Dbbam) 
 is one which occurs at least ten times in his works, in 
 all manner of applications. " Eeduce " (= bring back : hne 
 63), which occurs only here and in Eichabd III in the 
 plays, is also used by him, as by Marlowe. "Defused" 
 or "diffused" (line 61, = confused) is in the same case; 
 and this word too is used by Chapman. In the speech 
 of Queen Isabel at the end of the Act, again, with its 
 five double-endings to eight blank-verse lines, we have 
 " spousal," which occurs only here and in the spurious 
 Titus, but is common to Marlowe and Chapman. ■ 
 
 The versification of the speech of Burgundy may have 
 been revised by Shakespeare; but the double-endings are 
 not reasonably to be assigned to him ; and the vocabulary, 
 as we have seen, distinctly suggests Chapman. And his 
 hand is the more readily suspected here because we may 
 with some confidence assign to him the scene between 
 Henry and Katharine, as well as that in Act III between 
 Katharine and Alice. Both are unworthy of Shakespeare ; 
 both are on the plane of Chapman's weaker comedy-work ; 
 and both are likely to come from him, who, as we know, 
 read French. 
 
 Turning back to the first scene of the first Act, with its 
 23 per cent, of double-endings, its didactic evolution, and 
 its feeble finish, we are led there also to suspect the hand 
 of Chapman, though the special clues are few. Indigent 
 (line 16), a one-play word, is used by Chapman. " Gordian 
 knot," which occurs only here and in Cymbeline in the 
 Shakespeare plays, is to be found thrice in Greene, but also 
 thrice in Chapman ; and Hydra-headed, currance, and 
 
"HENRY V" 253 
 
 crescive, all once-used words, suggest his mint ; ' as does 
 defunction in Scene ii," line 58; though Shakespeare has 
 probably revised the verse throughout, as he certainly did 
 in the discussion on the honey-bees, which is so Chapman- 
 like in method and purport. 
 
 Among other word-clues are : 
 
 Accomplishment (Prol. i. 80). A one-play word, used 
 by Chapman, Shadow op Night; Poems, p. 12a, and 
 elsewhere. 
 
 Invoke (I. ii. 104), found in no other play, but common in 
 Chapman. 
 
 Bungle (I. ii. 105), also a one-play word, and found in 
 Chapman, Eevenge of Busst, III. ii. 166. 
 
 Shipwrack (V. v. 8), found in Titus and twice in 
 Pebiclbs, also common in Chapman, to whom it may be 
 assigned in Pebicles. 
 
 Pedigree (II. iv. 90), found only in 1 and 3 Henet VI, 
 also frequent in Chapman. 
 
 Captived (II. iv. 55), a one-play word, found in Chapman, 
 Widow's Teaes, IV. ii. 75. 
 
 Demonstrative (II. iv. 89), a one-play word, used by 
 Chapman, pref. to Eeader, with his Seven Books op the 
 Iliad. He also uses demonstratively. 
 
 Sun-burning (V. ii. 154), found (as sunburnt) in the 
 Tempest masque and in Tboilus (the use in Much Ado 
 is special), and several times used by Chapman. 
 
 Pattern (III. vii. 13), found in no other play, but several 
 times in Chapman (Htmn to Hebmes : Poems, p. 294a ; 
 23rd lUad, 258, 346, etc.). 
 
 Pax (III. vi. 42, 47), also a one-play word, used by 
 Chapman, May-Day, III. i. 85. 
 
 Fallows (V. ii. 54 : also fallow leas, line 44), found in the 
 Mebby Wives, I. i. 91, and Measure fob Measure, I. iv. 
 42, is also a Chapman-word ; 13th Od., 56 ; 13th II., 628. 
 
 ' Compare his fluencei and the fluxive of the Complaint. But 
 eresowe wai need by Draut in 1666. 
 ■ Founded on Holinibed. 
 
254 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Windpipe (III. vi. 45), occurs elsewhere only in Timon, 
 where we have seen reason to assign it to Chapman. 
 
 Fluent (III. vii. 36), a one-play word, used by Chapman 
 twice. He also has it as a noun, sing, and pi. ; also 
 fluences. 
 
 Intellectual (III. vii. 48), occurs elsewhere only in the 
 Ebeobs. Used at least four times by Chapman. 
 
 Belapse (IV. iii. 107), found elsewhere only in Pericles, 
 but used by Chapman, Hymn to Christ : Poems, p. 146, 
 and twice elsewhere. The line 
 
 Killing in relapse of mortality 
 
 has an extremely Chapmanesgue ring. 
 
 Foughten (IV. vi. 18), a one-play word, used twice by 
 Chapman, who also has foughten field. 
 
 Disciplines. This plural occurs many times in Act III, 
 Scene ii (Fluellen's "disciplines of the war"), but in no 
 other play. Chapman has " disciplines of war " in the 
 Epistle Dedicatory to the Iliads. 
 
 I hesitate to suggest that Chapman had a hand in the 
 comic scenes, and particularly in developing Pistol ; but a 
 number of our word-clues suggest as much. " Carry coals " 
 and "concavities" (a one-play word), for instance, in 
 III. ii., both point to double uses in Chapman's plays; and 
 Pistol's peculiar word "rim" (IV. iv. 15) occurs twice in 
 Chapman's Iliad (" belly's rim," v. 538, 856). In any case, 
 that part of the play is problematic. Two other problems 
 are raised by the forms fracted (noted in Timon), and 
 execiitors = executioners ; both found in The Downfall 
 OF Egbert Earl of Huntington, by Munday, which 
 Henslowe's Diary dates February 1597-8 : 
 
 The oarnifex or executor, riding on an ill eurtal, hath titubated or 
 Btnmbled, and is now oripplified, with broken or fracted tibiards. 
 
 Act II. Sc. ii. ed. Collier, p. 37. 
 
 As Chettle was afterwards paid for " mending " this play. 
 
••HENRY V" 255 
 
 which was not printed till 1601, the passage may be an 
 addition by him ; but it would be odd if he chanced to take 
 two of the once-used words of Henry V for a passage in 
 which he was poking fun at stilted terms, when one of them 
 had itself been humorously used, and the other occurred 
 in a passage of generally fine and pure diction. And when 
 we find in Munday's play, and in the sequel play on the 
 death of Huntington, these two lines: 
 
 And make the green sea red with Pagan blood 
 
 {Bownfall, IV. i. : ed. Collier, p. 68) ; 
 
 The muUitudeB of seas dyed red with blood : 
 
 (Death, II. ii. : ed. Collier, p. 50) ; 
 
 — both printed before the date commonly assigned to 
 Macbeth, with its 
 
 The multitudinous seas incarnadine, 
 Making the green one red — 
 
 we are compelled to ask whether Fleay was not right in 
 positing an early Macbeth, or whether Shakespeare made 
 his lines on those. 
 
 That many hands had dealt with Henry V before it was 
 staged in its present form in 1599, is the conclusion forced 
 upon us by any careful analysis.^ And it might be an 
 interesting task for any student, after reading Henry's 
 soliloquy in Act IV, Sc. i, to assign to its true author the 
 
 ' The word legerity, found only in this play in the Concordance, is 
 used by Jonson in Every Man Out (II. i.), which also belongs to 1599. 
 Jonson uses it farcically : in our play it is used seriously, so that he is 
 presumably not the first. Like so many of the new words of the time, 
 it is from the French. Jonson and Chapman concur in using a number 
 of imusual words, as evert, extrude, flexure, fluxure, confluence, embrion, 
 premonish, hieroglyphic ; and a large number of words foimd only once 
 or seldom La Shakespeare. Some, too, of the once-used words in 
 Shakespeare, not noted by me in Chapman, occur in Jonson, e.g. 
 " apperil," in Tvmon. We may infer that he and Chapman noted each 
 other's vocabulary. Jonson's seems about as large as Chapman's. 
 
256 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 utterly different versification of his " Crispian " speech in 
 the third scene. If the inquirer should decline to assign it 
 to any one but Shakespeare because it contains the phrase 
 " household words," he will please many people, but will per- 
 haps make a judicious posterity grieve. It should be noted 
 that the idea of the speech is that of the scene in Julius 
 C^SAB in which the conspirators predict that their deed will 
 be renowned among posterity. It may therefore, like that, 
 be pre- Shakespearean in origin. But the high proportion 
 of double-endings (23 per cent.) indicates later work ; and 
 an original speech by Peele (whose style is rather strongly 
 suggested), recast by Chapman, may be the solution. 
 
 A final ground for surmising his hand in this play is 
 the occurrence of the phrase "Your understanding soul" 
 (I. ii. 15). Compare : 
 
 There rules in thee an understanding soul. 
 
 Wth Odyssey, 362, 
 
 and the variants in 14th Od. 699 ; 23rd Od. 22 ; Hymn to 
 Hermes : Poems, p. 299a ; and Tears of Peace, p. 122i. 
 
§ 8. THE EARLY COMEDIES 
 
 I HAVE more than once maintained that the first two scenes 
 of the Comedy of Ebeoes, the first showing only 2 per 
 cent, of double-endings and the second 24, cannot be from 
 the same hand at the same time ; that the second, with its 
 poor diction and end-stopped lines, cannot have been 
 written by Shakespeare at the stage at which he reached 
 the higher percentage; and that the only solution is a 
 theory either (a) of collaboration or (6) of adaptation of 
 another man's work by Shakespeare. I have further 
 argued that the known abundance of Greene's work, taken 
 with the definite challenge of one of his admirers (after 
 his death) to other unnamed playwrights to deny that they 
 had purloined his plumes, gives ground for the surmise that 
 some of Shakespeare's comedies are recasts of Greene's. 
 And two plots which particularly savour of Greene, as 
 revealed in his romances, are those of the Two Gentlemen 
 and All's Well that Ends Well. 
 
 The Eeeors, on the other hand, with its Plautian basis, 
 might be anybody's play, Greene's or another's ; and the 
 bits of archaic verse hint at a quite old Elizabethan founda- 
 tion. There are some things which suggest Greene, such 
 as the name " Duke Menaphon " (V. i. 868), and the word 
 " disannul," which occurs only in this play and in 
 3 Henbx VI. But there are more which point to 
 Chapman; and as Greene cannot have produced a scene 
 with 24 per cent, of double-endings, we must look for a later 
 writer to account for them. Both matter and vocabulary 
 suggest Chapman. Such one-play words as inqmsitive 
 
 17 ^' 
 
258 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 (twice), defeature (twice), cupparently, carcanet, all point 
 to him. The first, it will be observed, occurs in both the 
 first and second scenes, as if Shakespeare, who never uses 
 it again, had here noticed it in the manuscript before him. 
 " Carcanet " occurs at least six times in Chapman's signed 
 work. "Intellectual," which occurs only here and in 
 Henry V ; and " vestments," which occurs only here and 
 in TiMON, are Chapman's words; and the speech (H. ii. 78): 
 
 Why IB Time such a niggard of hair, being, aa it is, bo plentiful an 
 excrement ? 
 
 with the phrase (line 111) "Who wafts us yonder?" are 
 two marks of him which raise the question whether he did 
 not write this scene. And though Adriana's speech to the 
 wrong Antipholus, in the next section of it, seems to have 
 been written by the young Shakespeare, the subsequent 
 speech in rhyme, with its line : 
 
 Be it wrong, you are from me exempt, 
 
 recalls Chapman. The argument is speculative; but the 
 presence of a mass of non- Shakespearean matter is stub- 
 bornly clear; and the general resemblance of the style to 
 that of the Sheew invites the linquiry whether the alien 
 hands are not the same in the two plays. The parallelism 
 of the lines : 
 
 That like a football you do spam me thnB (II. i. 8S), 
 and 
 
 And let him like a footbaJl lie for every man to spam 
 
 (Uth lUad, 136) 
 
 reinforces the surmise ; and when we find that so common 
 a word as housed, which occurs four times in this play, 
 never again appears in Shakespeare, and that the word is 
 frequently used by Chapman, it is impossible to lay the 
 hypothesis save by the discovery of another hand which has 
 
THE EARLY COMEDIES 259 
 
 the required marks in a fuller degree. Among the weaker 
 clues are : 
 
 Sapphire, III. ii. 138. Found in the Lover's Complaint 
 and in the Meert Wives (V. v. 75), in a line containing 
 the one-play word embroidery. Chapman uses both sapphire 
 and embroidery. 
 
 Shameless, V. i. 202. Occurs only in 1 and 3 Henry "VI. 
 Chapman has it in his poem, Height in Humility, and at 
 least nine times elsewhere. 
 
 Shipboard, V. i. 408. Found only in the Winter's 
 Tale, IV. iv. 668. Chapman has the word a-shipboard 
 frequently. 
 
 Swart, III. ii. 104. Occurs in King John, III. i. 46, and 
 1 Henry VI. Chapman has the word twice, also swarth. 
 
 Two words in the opening scene, exclude (line 10) and 
 sea-faring (line 81), raise, as does inquisitive, the question 
 whether Shakespeare rewrote that scene over matter by 
 Chapman, all three being one-play words, and all pointing 
 to Chapman. The plural bloods, found twice in the second 
 scene of Pericles, also in Timon, and in Cymbblinb (I. i. 1), 
 points in the same direction, as does incessant. Unspeak- 
 able, again, found twice in Titus, does not recur in 
 Shakespeare till the Winter's Tale, and this too is a 
 Chapman word. Finally, the phrase "the always wind- 
 obeying deep " is very much in Chapman's manner. 
 
 The Two Gentlemen, once so deeply doubted, is latterly 
 little impugned or discussed. And yet there are strong 
 grounds for pronouncing much of it non-Shakespearean. 
 In Act II, Scene iv, the proportion of double-endings rises 
 to 25 ; and in Scene vi, as in III. ii, it is nearly 20 — surely 
 impossible rates for the immature Shakespeare.' These 
 scenes are so much in the spirit and the manner of Greene 
 that only the double-endings cause any difficulty. That 
 
 ' Fleay dates the play 1693-4, and the end-etopped obaraoter of th« 
 Unas precludes its being later work for Shakespeare. 
 
260 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 both Marlowe and he rapidly increased their proportion is 
 certain ; but the highest figure I find in his late work is that 
 reached in the Countess scenes of Edward III, and that 
 does not exceed 12 per cent. Still, the clues to Greene are 
 so numerous and so valid that even if we infer the revising 
 activity of a later non-Shakespearean hand in the Gentlb- 
 MBN we can hardly doubt his prior presence. The opening 
 situation closely corresponds with that set out in his prose 
 tale, Gebene's Mourning Garment, and among the 
 special marks of his diction, in addition to the groups of 
 lines beginning with the same word, are these passages: 
 
 Nay, now yon are too flat 
 And mar the concord with too harsh a desoant.' 
 
 Whereon this month I have been hammering.' 
 
 I. ii. 98-4. 
 
 I. iu. 18. 
 
 To wreathe your arms like a malecontent ... to sigh like a schoolboy 
 
 that hath lost his A £ C.^ 
 
 II. i. 7-n. 
 
 The more thou damm'st it up the more it burns. 
 
 The current that with gentle murmur glides, 
 
 Thou know'st, being stopped, impatiently doth rage.* 
 
 II. vU. 26. 
 
 Wilt thou reach stars because they shine on thee ? 
 
 III. L 166. 
 
 Compare : 
 
 Why dost thou gaze against the sun, or catch at the wind ? Stars are 
 to be looked at with the eye, not reached at with the hand. 
 
 Pandoito, Bep. in Hazlitt's Sh. Lib. iv. 60. 
 
 A star too high for thee to gaze at. 
 
 Orphwrion : Works, xii. 76. 
 
 ■ The descant figure is used by Greene a dozen times. 
 • A common Greene tag. 
 
 3 The " malecontent" and the ABC are both Greenisms. 
 
 4 Both the figure about suppressed heat and the other are common in 
 Greene. 
 
THE EARLY COMEDIES 261 
 
 That there has been interpolation for the worse is seen 
 in Act II, Scene vii, where hnes 60-57 are an insertion, 
 certainly not by Shakespeare. It is to be feared that 
 Chapman was as likely as anybody else to have added 
 them. From clues which need not be here discussed I 
 have been led to the surmise that Peele had a hand in the 
 original play. But Peele cannot have supplied the high 
 proportion of double-endings, and there is no one else so 
 likely as Chapman. On the ordinary view of the date, the 
 play is early work for him ; and in the nature of the case 
 we cannot look for any clear emergence of his own style, 
 seeing how little of that there is even in the Blind Bbggab. 
 "Working over Greene, he would be governed by Greene's 
 manner. But a continuous sprinkling of terms which he 
 affected is at least ground enough for a tentative hypothesis, 
 in the lack of any other solution. On any view, Chapman 
 did not do much for the play, though probably more than 
 did Shakespeare, who is to be traced here and there by 
 speeches such as that beginning : '.' How use doth breed a 
 habit in a man ! " which has a touch of feeling not in 
 Peele's, or Greene's, or Chapman's way, though here too 
 there is probably an old substratum. And, doubtless, 
 Shakespeare developed Launce. 
 
§9. "ALL'S WELL THAT ENDS WELL" 
 
 In the early comedies thus far considered, the grounds for 
 suggesting collaboration or revision by Chapman are rather 
 slight on the literary side, apart from those of vocabulary, 
 v?hich in themselves are inconclusive. Plain marks of 
 Chapman's developed style, such as faced us in the Com- 
 plaint and TiMON, have in the nature of the case been 
 lacking. It is otherwise with All's Well that Ends 
 Well, to which we have had a number of verbal clues 
 in our inquiry. That unsatisfactory play, so hkely to have 
 been first drafted by Greene, was certainly not left by him 
 in anything like its present state. It presents the anomaly 
 of a large quantity of prose, long stretches of rhyme, and 
 nearly 29 per cent, of double-endings in its blank verse. 
 Fleay sought to account for these characteristics by pro- 
 nouncing it ' written early — rewritten circa 1601-2. But in 
 Measure for Measure, a much riper play, there are under 
 26 per cent, of double-endings, and in Hamlet only 22 per 
 cent. ; and to put this play later than those is to ascribe 
 to Shakespeare a marked retrogression in his art. 
 
 Ever since Tieck and Coleridge, there has been a general 
 recognition of the " two styles " of the piece; and in 1857 
 Grant White developed the point at length, arguing that 
 Shakespeare " wrote this play at first nearly all in rhyme 
 in the earliest years of his dramatic life, and afterward, 
 late in his career, possibly on two occasions, rewrote it and 
 gave it a new name ; using prose, to save time and labour, 
 in those passages the elevation of whfch did not require 
 
 ■ In Patt II of Shahetpewrt the Man, 1881. 
 
"ALL'S WELL THAT ENDS WELL" 263 
 
 poetical treatment, and in those which were suited to such 
 treatment giving us true although not highly finished 
 specimens of his grand style." ^ 
 
 The avowal of the difficulties is much more impressive 
 than the solution, which obtrudes its inadequacy. For 
 White, All's Well is the Love's Labotjb's Won of 
 Meres's 159Q list, renamed. Fleay agreed with him in 
 assigning such rhymed work as I. i. 231-44 to a very early 
 date. But that is not in Shakespeare's early manner : it is 
 as compressed and obscure as any of the blank verse ; and 
 the same holds of much of the other rhymed matter. As 
 for the identification of the play with Love's Labour's Won, 
 Fleay argued later,= with considerable force, that four 
 allusions in rhyming passages — IV. iv. 35; V. i. 24; IIL 333, 
 336 — show the play to have had its present title in its 
 earlier form, since " some of them, at least, belong to the 
 earher date." But everything turns on the assumption 
 that the rhymed matter in general is early or late Shake- 
 speare, and this has simply been taken for granted. If we 
 recognize the probability that the play contains much of 
 Chapman, alike in rhyme, in blank verse, and in prose, we 
 not only see a possible way to solve the riddle of the mass 
 of rhyme alongside of the mass of double-ended blank verse, 
 but leave open the possibility that the play originally was 
 a Love's Labour's Won, perhaps slightly adapted by 
 Shakespeare from a draft of Greene's. 
 
 Not that that thesis is necessary; though it is not easy 
 to decide on any other play that would really fit the old 
 title. Fleay's suggestion of Much Ado is unsatisfactory : 
 an early version of Twelfth Night or As You Like It 
 would be a likelier solution. What is important is the 
 solution of the anomalies presented by the existing play, 
 which, as regards Chapman, can perfectly well be dated 
 soon after 1598; whereas any date before 1604 is inad- 
 
 ' Introd. of 1857, rep. in Studies in Shakespeare, 1885, pp. 47-50. 
 ' Life of Shakespeare, pp. 216-17 
 
264 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 missible for Shakespeare in respect of the double-endings, 
 and any date after 1596 is unacceptable in respect of the 
 quality of much of the work, rhyme, prose, and blank verse 
 alike. 
 
 The great difficulty is to decide where Shakespeare enters. 
 This is a much more intricate problem than the analysis 
 of TiMON ; and I do not pretend to do more here than 
 indicate it. The Parolles of the opening scene seems to 
 me distinctly non-Shakespearean : ' his dialogue with Helena 
 is gratuitously and incongruously offensive." On the other 
 hand, the prose beginning may very well be a revision by 
 Shakespeare of Chapman's work, which is suggested as 
 basis by such passages as : 
 
 liaf. Your commendations, madam, get from her tean. 
 CovMt, 'Tis the best brine a maiden can teason her praise iu,> 
 
 Covmt, . . . Thy hlooA and virtue 
 
 Contend for empire in thee.' 
 
 And in Helena's first speech the vocabulary — -particular, 
 radiance, collateral, sphere, idolatrous (used only heres) — 
 points to Chapman, though the versification does not ; 
 while that of her second verse speech does, and does not 
 suggest Shakespeare at all. Thereafter the word-clues to 
 Chapman abound. " Prejudicates " (I. ii. 8) occurs only in 
 this play, whereas Chapman is rather fond of " prejudicate " 
 and " prejudicacy." Other once-used words in this Act, 
 such as discipled (I. ii. 28), enwombed (I. iii. 150), captious 
 
 ' The whole presentment of Parolles strongly recalls Chapman's 
 Monsieur D'OUve. 
 
 ' Professor A. C. Bradley, in his fine paper on Feste in the Shakespeare 
 Book of Homage, speaks of the " foul-mouthed " Clown of All's Well, 
 but does not say whether he thinks him Shakespearean. 
 
 3 See above, p. 72. As before noted, the same phraseology occurs in 
 Scene i of Twelfth Night. It would be odd if Shakespeare of his own 
 accord used Chapman's poor tag in both oases. 
 
 * See above, pp. 69-71. 
 
 s Chapman uses this word at least thrice : Bevenge of Buasy, IV. iv. 
 21 ; Ep. Ded. to Shadow of Night ; and Symnus in Noctem, § 18. 
 
"ALL'S WELL THAT ENDS WELL" 265 
 
 and intenible (1. 208), and the phrases " the many-colour'd 
 Iris," ^ and " render'd lost," all point to Chapman, who has 
 such forms as "render cheer'd," "render slain," "render 
 stay," " render friends," " render weak," " render happily 
 directed," never found in Shakespeare save in this instance. 
 " Embowell'd of their doctrine," again (1. 247), is a fantasy 
 of phrase much more like him than Shakespeare. On the 
 other hand, much of the verse suggests rewriting by 
 Shakespeare even later than 1602; while such a string 
 of double-endings as this (227-31) : 
 
 You know my father left me some prescriptions 
 Of rare and proved effects, such as his reading 
 And manifest experience had collected 
 For general sovereignty ; and that he vciU'd me 
 In heedfull'st reservation to hestow them, 
 
 reads like pure Chapman.^ Then in Act II, in the scene 
 between the King and Helena, we have first a non- 
 Shakespearean blank verse (beginning, on Helena's part, 
 "with two broken lines), presenting 13 double-endings in 
 28 hnes, or 46 per cent. ; and then 80 lines of rhyme, 
 broken by one line unrhymed, and including the rhyme of 
 "minister" and "finisher." I submit that all this is 
 non- Shakespearean, and that it is either the work of 
 Chapman or a mixture of Chapman and older material. 
 
 " Fiery torcher," strongly suggests the inventor of 
 "torchy evening" (Heed and Lbandek, V. 426), who 
 BO often speaks of the torch of the sun or day ; and much 
 of the rhymed matter is as like the couplets in Chapman's 
 tragedies as it is unhke anything in Shakespeare save the 
 spurious rhymes in Othbllo and the play-scene in Hamlet, 
 which we have seen some reason for connecting tentatively 
 with Chapman. In any case, the play-scene in Hamlet is 
 purposely distinct from the play ; whereas here there is no 
 
 ' See above, p. 212. 
 
 ' As does the string of fire double-endiuga in the Induction to the 
 Shbxw, i. 182-6. 
 
266 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 reason whatever in the nature of the matter for a sudden 
 leap from blank verse into heroic couplets. The quantity 
 of the rhymed matter, in fact, raises a question v?hether it 
 can have been in the main taken over from the surmised 
 original by Greene, who in James IV and in Sblimus has 
 many such transitions, and much rhymed matter. 
 Some passages strengthen this surmise. The lines : 
 
 Ere twice the horses of the stm shall bring 
 Their fiery toroher his diurnal ring ; 
 Ere twice in murk and occidental damp 
 Moist Hesperus hath quench'd his sleepy lamp, 
 Or four and twenty times the pilot's glass 
 Hath told the thievish minutes how they pass, 
 What is infirm from your sound parts shall fly, 
 Health shall live free, and sickness freely die, 
 
 have an old-fashioned quality, though "torcher" smacks 
 as aforesaid of Chapman, and is not found, I think, in any 
 of the pre-Shakespeareans. Might not the passage then 
 have been originally penned by Greene? who in his 
 Alphonsus King of Arbagon has this (IV. ii.) : 
 
 Thrice Hesperus with pomp and peerless pride 
 Hath heav'd his head forth of the eastern seas; 
 Thrice Cynthia, with Phoebus' borrow'd beams. 
 Hath shown her beauty through the darkish clouds. 
 Since . . . 
 
 after writing in the previous scene that 
 
 Thrice ten times Phcebus with his golden beams 
 Hath compassed the circle of the sky; 
 Thrice ten times Ceres hath her workmen hir'd. 
 And fiU'd her barns with fruitful crops of corn. 
 Since . . . 
 
 It is clear that Greene would not have scrupled to manipulate 
 such matter yet again ; and now the question arises whether 
 the play-scene in Hamlet may not be a survival from the 
 old play by Kyd, and whether Greene, perchance, wrote it ; 
 for there we have the same simple mythological machinery, 
 
"ALL'S WELL THAT ENDS WELL" 367 
 
 and, as already noted, the same kind of rhj'med verse as 
 that of All's Well, with a similar enumeration : 
 
 Full thirty times hath Phoebue' oart gone round 
 Neptane's salt wash, and Tellus' othbA ground, 
 And thirty doxen moons with borrow'd sheen 
 About the world have times twelve thirties been 
 Since . . . 
 
 A strong objection is constituted by the fact that in the 
 First Quarto of Hamlet the play-scene begins quite 
 differently, in verse which does not appear to be Greene's, 
 and might possibly be (though I do not think it is) early 
 Shakespeare. We have our choice of four inferences. 
 Either (1) Shakespeare wrote old-fashioned rhyming passages 
 both in All's Well and in Hamlet in deliberate imitation 
 of Greene; or (2) those passages are both survivals of 
 Greene, who might very well have collaborated with Kyd 
 on the old Hamlet,' and who, as aforesaid, is a likely first 
 draftsman for All's Well; or (3) Chapman deliberately 
 imitated, both in the play-scene and in All's Well, 
 Greene's old-fashioned machinery of phrase in new rhymed 
 hnes, which in the case of All's Well make an incon- 
 gruous archaic effect ; or (4) that Chapman merely adapted 
 Greene in All's Well and then imitated the effect in the 
 play-scene. Having regard to the Ql text of Hamlet, 
 the economical course seems to be to adopt the fourth 
 view. It seems unthinkable that Shakespeare should copy 
 Greene's obsolete manner to such bad purpose in All's 
 Well ; and that either earlier or later he should also use 
 it for an archaistic effect in Hamlet. On the other hand. 
 Chapman, with his fertihty of invention, could hardly be 
 reduced to such double imitation either ; for if he originated 
 the scene in All's Well, or drafted the whole, he was 
 merely burdening and weakening the realistic effect by 
 introducing the archaism. Seeing, however, that he is 
 
 ' A theory to this effect several times obtruded itself on me long ago. 
 Gisene, I think, frequently collaborated with Kyd. 
 
268 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 otherwise abundantly traceable in All's Well, and that 
 Greene seems traceable only in the rhymed matter, the 
 prose clowneries, and the idiom " for to," ' we are still 
 strengthened in the theory that this is a recast by Chapman 
 of an old play which Greene drafted, and to which Shake- 
 speare may have done something in his early days of 
 adaptation as well as later. It will be found, I think, 
 that a basis laid by Greene and worked over by Chapman 
 will alone account for all the phenomena alike in the 
 Hamlet play-scene and in the rhymed parts of All's 
 Well. But to say exactly what Chapman has added to or 
 altered in Greene is not easy. 
 
 The second scene of this Act, with its coarse, incongruous, 
 and irrelevant dialogue between the Countess and the clown, 
 raises the same question. It has no wit to suggest Shake- 
 speare; and as a piece of purposeless clowning it could 
 not possibly have been written by him after 1596, or, if 
 written by him in a bad hour of his nonage, retained by 
 him in a play of his own, recast in his maturity. Utterly 
 inferior as it is to the Speed and Gobbo scenes in the Two 
 Gentlemen and the Mbeghant, I do not believe that 
 Shakespeare wrote a line of it. Technically speaking, the 
 only excuse for it is to make a pause between the previous 
 scene, in which the King agrees to try the cure, and that 
 which follows, in which his complete recovery is announced. 
 But Shakespeare could never have been driven by such a 
 need to such a beggarly device as this ; and I am unwilling 
 to credit such stuff to Chapman, who has nothing so poor 
 in any of his comedies. Again one Sisks whether it was an 
 item of the supposed old play, retained in the interest of 
 the " groundlings." 
 
 Lafeu's speech beginning the third scene will naturally 
 
 ' As this was adopted by Kyd, who has it eight times in Arden of 
 FavBRSHAM, he might conceivably be involved here. But as Kyd's 
 presence in the old Hamlet is certain, and Greene is clearly indicated 
 in All's Well, it is unnecessary to complicate the question with a 
 theory of their collaboration. 
 
"ALL'S WELL THAT ENDS WELL" 269 
 
 be claimed for Shakespeare, on the score of its religiosity ; 
 but in line 10 we have the word " relinquished," found in 
 no other play, but used by Chapman ; in line 14 his common 
 word " authentic," found only in this play, in Tegilus, and 
 in the Meekt Wives ; and in line 40 " transcendence," a 
 word found in no other play; whereas Chapman has both 
 " transcend " (repeatedly) and " transcendent," as well as 
 " transcension." It should be noted, too, that the whole 
 manner of the dialogue between Lafeu and ParoUes is 
 unlike anything else in Shakespeare. The aim appears 
 to be a kind of superior clowning, a cheap form of 
 " character acting " in the modern stage sense ; and Lafeu's 
 final sentence before the King's entrance, with its pauses,' 
 is quite unique in the Shakespeare plays. All the while, 
 Lafeu, setting out with a devout paean to the supernatural, 
 is lightly gossiping with the knave Parolles ; and when the 
 King enters Lafeu recommences with " Lustig, as the 
 Dutchman says." Can it possibly be Shakespeare ? 
 
 That Shakespeare's revising hand enters in what follows 
 is very likely; but again we have a series of alternations 
 between blank verse, rhymed couplets, and prose, the King 
 in one speech passing after eight lines of blank into twenty 
 lines of rhyme, and again reverting to blank verse, in a 
 fashion impossible of associating with the ripe Shakespeare, 
 or, for that matter, with the unripe. These couplets are 
 not at all like Shakespeare's early verse. They savour 
 alternately of Greene and Chapman ; and there is absolutely 
 no ground for thinking that Shakespeare in his maturity 
 would thus capriciously insert great slabs of serious rhymed 
 dialogue in scenes of blank verse and prose. Chapman, 
 on the other hand, though he never inserts such slabs in 
 a signed play, has the standing habit, in his tragedies, 
 of interlarding his blank verse with varying lengths of 
 sententious rhyme, very much in the manner of this ; and 
 though a foundation of such rhymed matter, such as may 
 
 ' If, with the " Globe " editors, we accept Johnson's arrangement. 
 
270 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 well have been supplied by Greene, is needed to account 
 both for the quantity and for the archaic pseudo-classical 
 rhetoric, such a foundation is, in the terms of the ease, just 
 what Chapman might be expected to accept and adapt. 
 
 As little ground is there for crediting Shakespeare with 
 the 46 per cent, of double-endings in anything written in 
 his middle period. The blank verse here is not even in his 
 late manner, being largely end-stopped. It is simply 
 another man's work; and to call it a "true though not 
 highly finished specimen of his grand style" is a vain 
 compromise. Any one who will read the opening sc^ne of 
 Chapman's Moksiexje D'Olivb, with its 43 per cent, of 
 double-endings (24 in the first 42 lines) will see, I think, 
 the real source. 
 
 And always the word-clues continue to point to Chapman. 
 " Capriccios," ' found only in this play, occurs in his works 
 (Hymn to Pan, 16; cwpriches, The Gentleman Ushbb, 
 V. i. ; capricions, The Widow's Teaes, III. ii. 189) ; 
 " artist," occurring here (II. iii. 10) and in Tboiltjs and 
 Pericles, is, as before noted, a Chapman word; "pre- 
 sumption" (II. i. 64), found only in the non- Shakespearean 
 Henex VI plays apart from this, is frequent in Chapman ; 
 "cassock," occurring only in this play (IV. iii. 192), is used 
 by Chapman twice in the 14th Odyssey (653, 737) and twice 
 in the 15th (429, 438); and "perpetually" (IV. iii. 314), 
 found as above noted in Pericles and the Shrew, is also 
 frequent in his work. "Eeal," seen to be Chapman's in 
 the Complaint, is presumably his here. " Jeweller," 
 occurring only in Timon and this play (V. iii. 297), we have 
 already traced to the same hand. " Verbal " (V. iii. 137), 
 which does not recur in Shakespeare till Leab and Cymbb- 
 LiNB, is also a common word of Chapman's (Annot. 1 to 
 Hesiod's Georgics, i ; Homer's Hymn to Neptune ; 
 Eugenia, p. 3286 ; thrice in notes to trans, of Musseus). 
 
 At least seven more are worth collating : 
 
 ' Oftpriocio is a penonage in the Matli of ih« Iim§r T»mplt. 
 
"ALL'S WELL THAT ENDS WELL" 271 
 
 Applications (I. ii. 74). Nowhere else in Shakespeare. 
 Frequent in Chapman : Note 8. to Hxmnus in 
 Ctnthiam ; Ovid's Banquet, st. 93 ; Comm. on 
 B. IL of Iliad, thrice ; Comm. on B. II, twice ; and 
 elsewhere. In the poem Db Guiana (Poems, p. 51a) 
 it is used in the medical sense which it bears in 
 All's Well. 
 
 Philosophical (II. iii. 2), which occurs nowhere else in the 
 Plays, was not common anywhere in 1600 ; but it 
 occurs from time to time in Chapman : Epist. Ded. 
 to Ovid's Banquet; Note on Hesiod: Poems, 
 p. 217a, etc. 
 
 Embossed : " We have almost embossed him " (III. vi. 107). 
 The word here has the force of " ambusted " or 
 " surrounded " : elsewhere in the Shakespearean 
 plays it always means " foam-flecked " or swollen 
 (as a sore). In the special sense which it bears in 
 this play it is used by Chapman at least twice : 
 
 Like hinds that have no hearts, 
 Who, weturied with a long-run field, are instantly embost. 
 
 4th lUad, 258. 
 
 Embost within a shady bill, the lucems charge him round. 
 
 nth lUad, 421. 
 
 Coherent (III. vii. 39). Only here in the Plays, though 
 coherence occurs in 2 Heney IV (V. i. 73). Chap- 
 man has coherents (pref. "To the Understander " 
 with Achilles' Shield) ; also coherence several 
 times. 
 
 Musics (HI- vii. 40). A much more significant item. This 
 plural occurs elsewhere in the Plays only in Cymbe- 
 LINE, II. iii. 44. It is not so given in the Globe 
 edition, but is so printed in the Folio. Chapman 
 uses it at least thrice : Hero and Leandeb, 3rd 
 sestiad, 14 ; Horn. Hymn to Apollo : Poems, p. 281a ; 
 Monsieur D'Olivb, I. i. 26. In this scene the verse 
 
272 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 is not Shakespeare's : it is sufficient to contrast it 
 
 with the bulk of Scene ii of Act IV to reaUze as 
 
 much. 
 Sector (IV. iii. 69). A one-play word. Frequent in 
 
 Chapman: 6th Iliad, 36; 2nd Iliad, 69; Sir Giles 
 
 Goosecwp, IV. iii. 52 ; Ebvengb of Busst, II. i. 38. 
 Fisnomy (IV. v. 42). Nowhere else. Chapman has Vis- 
 
 nomy twice: All Fools, II. i. 159; Mat-Day, 
 
 III. iii. 126. 
 
 His hand thus appears to pervade the play ; and though it 
 may be taken as certain that no more than Shakespeare 
 could he have planned such a foul foil as Bertram to such a 
 spirit as Helena, he has never got away from the evil lead 
 that was presumably given by Greene, the inveterate 
 inventor of villainous heroes. But the Parolles action is 
 probably altogether Chapman's, being a construction closely 
 akin to that of Monsieur D' Olive in the play of that title, 
 where, however, the titular character is a mere excrescence 
 on the play that bears his name, even as is Parolles in 
 All's Well. 
 
 Enough has been said, I trust, to present the problem, a 
 full solution of which will be a lengthy undertaking, involv- 
 ing a detailed study of vocabulary, phrase, syntax, and 
 ideas. With the positing of the theory of Chapman's main 
 share in All's Well, our indication of the Chapman- 
 Shakespeare problem may for the present pause. If it is 
 wholly or substantially astray, criticism should show aa 
 much. If it is in any measure sound, independent examina- 
 tion should lead to further elucidations. The whole of the 
 ground has not even yet been outlined, for the Mebby 
 Wives of Windsob has been indicated by a number of 
 word-clues in our progress as a play in which Chapman 
 may have shared ; King John is slightly brought into 
 question ; and Henbt VIII is indicated in the same 
 fashion, as regards the Shakespearean portions. These, 
 
"ALL'S WELL THAT ENDS WELL" 273 
 
 too, are problem plays, though there has not so far been 
 any recognition in the first and second of " two styles." 
 But that is not a matter of much importance ; and enough 
 has already been said, I fear, to elicit an abundance of 
 objection, if not of censure. On that head I will say 
 something in conclusion. 
 
 18 
 
EPILOGUE 
 
 The case for Chapman's authorship of A Lover's 
 Complaint is, I think, made out decisively ; and the case 
 for his origination of Timon substantially, though, by reason 
 of the very nature of the problem, with less obvious com- 
 pleteness. The possibility that there may have been a 
 later hand, and even that the work of prior hands may still 
 be present, involve a larger measure of doubt. In regard 
 to the other theses advanced or broached, the measure of 
 proof is avowedly in various degrees inferior ; though in all 
 the cases in which I have made a somewhat confident 
 affirmation I could extend the evidence, and may hereafter 
 do so. In the meantime I invite competent criticism. 
 
 All such theses as those above advanced are sure to elicit 
 from many readers — if, that is, many readers chance to see 
 them — a quite spontaneous opposition, in which denial is 
 first posited, and arguments are sought for, if at all, 
 afterwards. It is apt to be hastily inferred that any 
 elimination of matter from the Shakespeare Canon means 
 a diminution of Shakespeare's glory. Yet there could be 
 no greater misapprehension. So far as I know, no attempt 
 at such elimination ' has ever touched any save inferior 
 or second-rate work ^ — a circumstance which might set 
 objectors thinking. Of course there may be dispute as to 
 
 ' I entirely exclude, of course, Bacomst and other " anti-Stratfordiau " 
 theses. 
 
 ' The best piece of work in the Shakespeare plays which I would 
 assign to another hand is Clarence's dreaoa iu Biohard III, which 
 appears to me to be clearly Marlowe's. 
 
EPILOGUE 875 
 
 what is inferior work : the late Dr. Furnivall was much 
 disturbed when the Cambridge editors suggested that 
 Hamlet's "cloud and camel chaff" of Polonius, among 
 other things, was part of the old play and not of Shake- 
 speare's new writing. But nobody, I think, ever impugned 
 one of the great plays as a whole, or a really great speech in 
 any. And this means that no one has ever seen anything 
 more beautiful in any contemporary Elizabethan's work 
 than Shakespeare's. It is always by his sheer superiority 
 that he is or can be finally discriminated. But still men 
 chafe at every suggestion of discrimination. 
 
 The beginning of the trouble is that so many people start 
 by reading uncritically whatever is called Shakespeare, and 
 end by idolizing it all, to the point of finding beauties 
 in TlTxrs Andbonicus and nobility in the worst bombast 
 of Hekby Y, some of it comparable to the eloquence of 
 a German journal over a Zeppelin raid. Of such idolatry 
 the outcome is final blindness to Shakespeare's supreme 
 power. Such readers cannot rightly know its magic 
 quality, because they are inured in admiration of matter 
 which wholly lacks that attribute. I will undertake to 
 produce from the work of Munday and Chettle, Peele, 
 Greene and Kyd, to say nothing of Chapman and Webster 
 and Marston and Jonson, scores of pages which could easily 
 pass muster as Shakespearean for the idolaters if they found 
 it all bound up with his works. The vin ordinaire of the 
 Elizabethan drama is for them indistinguishable from the 
 vintage of the Master. 
 
 But that is not the only trouble. Even among students 
 who can distinguish between styles, there operates the 
 conservative habit which blindly cherishes the traditionary 
 canon. Thus we find good editors, who recognize the 
 general inferiority both of matter and manner in the 
 spurious historical plays, contending nevertheless for 
 the Shakespearean character of these, either in whole or in 
 part, in the teeth of their fown evidence. They argue. 
 
276 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 justly enough, that we must not suppose Shakespeare neces- 
 sarily incapable of bad work ; and they see fit to classify a 
 quantity as the yield of his apprenticeship. But inasmuch 
 as their tests are traditionary and not truly critical, they 
 tend to miss the issue. The real question is as to the kind 
 of inferior work that is genuine. Shakespeare's work has 
 certain faults at the height of his power; and different 
 faults in his immaturity. A style without faults, in fact, 
 would be a style without much power or character — 
 "faultily faultless." But all along he has qualities of 
 beauty and power and charm which other men lack ; and 
 always his qualities transcend theirs. In battling for 
 quantity, in clinging devotedly to the whole canon, the 
 conservatives are simply impairing its credit for quality. 
 As a result of this attitude and practice, there has grown 
 up a further apprehension, now to be considered, lest 
 Shakespeare's distinction should suffer from a transfer to 
 other men of the originating share in any of the works 
 hitherto regarded as either wholly or mainly of his planning 
 and shaping. It is being reluctantly conceded, after a 
 hundred years of dispute and resistance, that not merely 
 are most of his plots borrowed, but in certain cases he has 
 retained large parts of other men's plays. When this fact 
 is dubiously faced in regard to the Henby VI group and 
 Hbnby VIII, there seems to be a doubled reluctance to 
 go further, as in the instance of Furnivall's flurry over 
 Hamlet. There will probably be less resentment over any 
 given apportionment of TiMON and Pericles, since the 
 former is an unpopular and the latter in large part an 
 objectionable play ; but as to Tegilus and Cbbssida, I 
 fear, even the general critical perplexity over the whole will 
 not preclude indignation at the theory that the finest 
 writing in it is really a rewriting by Shakespeare of another 
 man's draft. And though every sensitive reader winces 
 over All's Well, and most qualified critics have recog- 
 nized in it "two styles," I have no doubt that I incur 
 
EPILOGUE 277 
 
 opprobriam by explaining the anomalies of the piece as 
 the phenomena of a vamped Chapman play (with 
 probably a large nucleus of Greene) partially rewritten 
 by Shakespeare. 
 
 It may perhaps serve to limit the confusion of the 
 debate if I briefly indicate my own attitude towards the 
 feeling — as distinct from the reasoning — involved in such 
 resistance. It seems to me to grow out of the habit of 
 admiring Shakespeare for the wrong things. There is 
 really no high merit, though there is some merit, in 
 sheer literary fecundity as apart from inspiration; and 
 neither is there any rare merit in the faculty of plot- 
 making. That faculty has been possessed in a high 
 degree by men like Scribe, who have added nothing to 
 great literature. Shakespeare, so far as I can see, never 
 concerned himself about the invention of plots. He 
 knew they were plentiful as blackberries : what he was 
 interested in was simply the selection of themes which 
 would " draw " well on the stage ; and what he put out 
 his strange power upon was the creation of living figures, 
 speaking a living yet beautifully idealized speech, in 
 whatever story or history he selected. Being a practical 
 playwright, trained on the stage, he knew better than most 
 men that a play must move in a certain way to secure a 
 good total effect ; but, obliged as he was to find new 
 Bubjects year after year, he had frequently to handle faulty 
 plots, just as they came in his way. 
 
 We are partly helped to realize the process by our fuller 
 knowledge of the case of Molifere. Like Shakespeare, 
 " servile to all the skyey influences," that great dramaturge 
 took plots and persons, lines, scenes and situations, from 
 classics or vieux bouguins, personal recitals, treatises, or 
 current plays. As Sainte-Beuve notes, he went to " Plaute 
 et Terence pour des fables enti^res, Strapparole et Bocace 
 pour des fonds de sujets, Eabelais et Eegnier pour des 
 caractferes, Boisrobert et Kotrou et Cyrano pour des sctoes, 
 
278 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Horace et Montaigne et Balzac pour de simples phrases: 
 tout y figure ; mais tout s'y transforme, rien n'y est le 
 m^me. Li oi il imite le plus, qui done pourroit se 
 plaindre ? " The very power of assimilation, in fact, may 
 be one of the forms of originahty. "MoliSre, le plus 
 cr^ateur et le plus inventif des g6nies, est celui peutStre qui 
 a le plus imitd, et de partout." 
 
 It is true that Sainte-Beuve makes the further pronounce- 
 ment : " Une marque souveraine du g6nie dramatique 
 fortement caracterise, c'est, selon moi, la f6condit6 de 
 production," his view being that any fairly gifted mind 
 may make one good novel, or even one good drama, out of 
 its own experience, but not more : fecundity is the mark of 
 a great gift. But this is surely an ill-considered verdict. 
 An immense fecundity does not put Lope de Vega or 
 Alexandre Hardy on the same plane with the great masters. 
 The fecundity of these men, and of Moli^re and Shake- 
 speare alike, is an economic phenomenon: they were all 
 " in the business," writing for a living ; but genius and 
 mere talent alike may go with large productivity, which 
 therefore is no "marque souveraine." To say that because 
 the most commonly acclaimed Masters are prolific, no man 
 with a great dramatic gift can have failed to be prolific, 
 is merely to reason in a circle. It is true that variety 
 of production tells of range of gift ; but the faculty for 
 variety may remain latent in the man of one play, merely 
 because no economic call has been made upon it. Heinrich 
 von Kleist is a greater dramatist than Scribe. Le Sage, 
 who wrote one good comedy, might have written fifty. 
 Sainte-Beuve himself accepts the verdict of Voltaire, that 
 " quand Molifere n'auroit fait que I'Ecole des Maris il seroit 
 encore un excellent comique." 
 
 And this is our answer to the objection that in making 
 Shakespeare indebted to others for drafts either of plays or of 
 persons we are lessening his credit for genius. With a rarer, 
 greater, and finer faculty than Moli^re's, he was yet related 
 
EPILOGUE 279 
 
 like Moli&re to his environment ; like him he " found his 
 property everywhere " ; and like him he was primitively 
 free of the modern scruple about literary borrowing. But 
 indeed, the notion that there can be an absolute " invention " 
 either of plots or of characters is in itself a psychological 
 fallacy. All dramatic " creation " is but re-creation, whether 
 the dramatist takes his persons from history, from legend, 
 from previous plays or fictions, or from his own inner 
 world of vaguely or clearly remembered people. How little 
 is to be achieved by mere invention without the genius 
 for portraiture may be realized by any one who will seek to 
 differentiate the minor characters in Jonson's Sejands or 
 to analyse those of his Cynthia's Eevels. Shakespeare 
 was not the man to spend his powers in personifying mere 
 foibles or characteristics, or in a mere quest for a plot which 
 no one else had handled. 
 
 The traditional or orthodox conception figures him as 
 a leisured student who for the most part selected themes 
 from the romantic and historical literature of his time and 
 thoughtfully built up whole plays on these. This I take to 
 be a serious misconception. Shakespeare was not a leisured 
 artist. He was an actor-manager, who did regular theatre 
 work through nearly all the period in which he wrote or 
 adapted plays ; and as I have never seen an actor who, 
 starting -mth an originally high artistic faculty, retained it 
 long intact as a manager, I do not believe that even 
 Shakespeare was either a powerful actor or a dramatist 
 deeply and habitually absorbed in play-construction. Long 
 ago, Steevens, an accomplished though perverse Shake- 
 spearean scholar, committed himself to the proposition 
 that " a time may arrive in which it will become evident, 
 from books and manuscripts yet undiscovered and un- 
 examined, that Shakespeare did not attempt a single 
 play on any subject till the effect of the same story, or 
 at least the ruling incidents in it, had been tried on the 
 stage and familiarized to the audience." At two points, 
 
280 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 this theorem outgoes its real grounds, as was Steevens's way. 
 It is idle to forecast discoveries of books and manuscripts 
 yet undiscovered and unexamined ; and it is unwarrantable 
 to suggest that Shakespeare's company never produced an 
 entirely new piece. But if we put the modified proposition 
 that Shakespeare rarely produced a play without seeing 
 either a previous version or a draft by another playwright, 
 I think we shall be very near the truth. And I do not 
 think that this view is in the slightest degree derogatory to 
 Shakespeare's genius, on any sane conception of it. 
 
 It does not in the least disturb my admiration for him 
 to believe that he worked up Teoiltjs and Cbbssida from 
 drafts by Chapman and Dekker and Chettle : on the 
 contrary, that solution elucidates for me the mystery of his 
 authorship of — or in — such a piece, and leaves me more 
 satisfied than ever before of his artistic sanity. He handled 
 the matter because it came in his professional way : it was 
 a possible stage-play on a celebrated theme, and he spent 
 upon it some of his highest faculty ; turning into magnifi- ' 
 cent verse the didactics of Chapman, whose blank verse is 
 rarely more than stiffly strenuous and explosively powerful ; 
 and rapidly limning, as no one else could do, pictures of 
 Cressida and Diomed and Troilus which survive all the 
 incongruities of their framework. Finally, he left the play 
 unsatisfactory as a whole because it simply could not be 
 made satisfactory — unless we ask for an experiment in the 
 way of the modern ideal of a play that does not organically 
 end, but lets the curtain fall on a continuing situation. It 
 is quite possible that Shakespeare could have contemplated 
 such an effect, though Chapman's use of it in Bybon's 
 CoNSPiEACT was not encouraging. 
 
 But the fact remains that the story of Troilus and 
 Cressida could not yield a finish for the stage ; and what the 
 play does is to wind up, lamely as must be, an action which 
 had been made multifarious in order to widen its appeal, 
 and had thereby outgone the artistic bounds of good drama. 
 
EPILOGUE 281 
 
 And Shakespeare, I fancy, saw all this much more readily 
 than I do. He did what he thought worth doing ; and I 
 imagine he shrugged his shoulders over the mess that the 
 others, among them, had made of the story of Hector and 
 Achilles. To straighten that out would only be to make the 
 play still more formless and centrifugal. The Achilles 
 story ought never to have been there : to drop it would be 
 to drop one of the " attractions " of the medley; and so it 
 was cut, or left out, to meet the mere exigency of time. 
 
 An illustration of the effect, even among accomplished 
 scholars, of the habit of valuing Shakespeare for the wrong 
 things, I think, is the criticism that has been passed on his 
 portrait of Cressida as a " mere sketch struck off with a 
 few swift, hard strokes," ' in contrast with Chaucer's, 
 which is extolled for its more sympathetic quality. Shall 
 we next have an indictment of Lady Macbeth ? If Shake- 
 speare's sketch is " hard," then every presentment of a bad 
 character is so. .^sthetically speaking, as regards what is 
 clearly Shakespeare's work in it, it is no more " hard " than 
 his picture of Juliet. It is just true. Chaucer's Criseyde, 
 on the contrary, is not a portrait at all. What he gives us 
 is a tenderly protracted, dreamily detailed, narrative of an 
 episode which yields us no legible character ; for Chaucer's 
 Criseyde is finally unintelligible, by Chaucer's own kindly 
 avowal, which in effect begs us not to be hard on the lady, 
 for whom there is really nothing to be said. Chaucer's 
 dream-woman, put in a play, would be a nullity. A drama 
 is not a love poem ; and had Chaucer been reborn to write 
 a play for an Elizabethan theatre he would have worked 
 very much more on the plane of his " Canterbury Tales " — 
 with their "hard (!) swift strokes" — than on that of his 
 delicately garrulous and winningly diffuse presentment of 
 the traditional faithless one, whom he simply would not 
 punish, being resolved, for once in a way, not to be hard on 
 a decried woman. 
 ■ ProfesBor T. M. Parrott, ed. of Chapman's Comedies, 1914, p. 896, 
 
282 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 Shakespeare could easily have written a discursive poem 
 on Cressida as long as the Vbntjs or the Ltjcbbce : re- 
 casting a play, he made a masterly dramatic figure. What 
 does it matter to our estimate of him if the suggestion of 
 such a play came to him from the outside ? None of his 
 corrivals could have drawn a Cressida to match his. And 
 what matters it to our admiration of him if he got from 
 Chapman a draft of his Ulyssean scenes — the kind of 
 strenuously didactic draft that Chapman would make? 
 Shakespeare of his own accord, I take it, would never have 
 planned these cothurnate discussions, which yield no action 
 and are finally non-dramatic. But, being the greatest of all 
 masters of dramatic blank-verse, he saw fit to transfigure 
 them by the witchcraft of his style. A friend who once 
 saw Tboiltjs semi-officially played tells me that those 
 scenes, undramatic as they are, went successfully because 
 of the sheer charm of the admirable writing. I have no 
 great wish to see the play staged for an effect which I can 
 get better in the reading ; but I can well believe that when 
 Shakespeare set himself to lift a didactic dialogue of 
 Chapman's into beauty by sheer greatness of verse he 
 achieved even on the stage a success which Chapman never 
 attained there or anywhere else. 
 
 I shall be told, perhaps, that by identifying as Chapman's 
 much of the new vocabulary in Timon and Tboiltjs I am 
 taking away from Shakespeare's credit, the abundance of 
 his vocabulary being one of the grounds on which he is 
 commonly extolled. But poetic or dramatic genius is not 
 a matter of mere abundance of vocabulary ; and Shake- 
 speare's supremacy lies not in the number of his words but 
 in his admirable choice and use of them. And what does it 
 matter whence he derived his vocabulary, seeing that he 
 must have derived it somewhence ? It will not be seriously 
 contended, I hope, that his status in any way depends on 
 the number of words he is supposed to have invented. If 
 80, there will have to be a stringent reconsideration of the 
 
EPILOGUE 283 
 
 vocabulary claim in all its aspects ; and indeed there had 
 better be a reconsideration in any case. 
 
 Dr. Henry Bradley, writing with all the weight of an 
 expert and a thoughtful scholar, in his paper on " Shake- 
 speare and the English Language " in the Book of Homage, 
 comments on the familiar statistics of Shakespeare's vocabu- 
 lary. "I have never met," he writes, "with any account 
 of the methods by which any of these conflicting results 
 have been arrived at, nor do I know who is responsible for 
 any of them." One of them, commonly traced to Max 
 Muller, is understood to have been got by a simple calcula- 
 tion from the Concordance. Some Baconians avowedly 
 hold that it suffices to count the words in that. But the 
 futility of these estimates lies not merely in the lack of any 
 indication as to what is meant by " words " — whether or 
 not it includes all the flections of verbs, all the combinations, 
 all the names of places and persons, all the French words, 
 and all the Welsh and other mispronunciations — but in the 
 lack of any tolerable comparative estimate. We want to 
 know whether, if Shakespeare used 15,000 words, other 
 men did or did not use more. 
 
 I have seen an assertion that whereas Shakespeare used 
 15,000 words, Milton used only 8,000 — a levity of assertion 
 apparently reached by a loose calculation from the Con- 
 cordance to Milton's Poems, as there is none for his prose. 
 Without wasting words on that, I will proceed respectfully 
 to challenge Dr. Bradley's conclusion, which is, that 
 " there appears to be no reason to doubt the correctness 
 of the common belief that the English poet who surpasses 
 all others in the skilful use of words also ranks first in the 
 number of the words that he pressed into his service." ' 
 Solid reason for such a doubt, I think, will be found in a 
 perusal of Chapman and Jonson, to name no other ; and I 
 wish the authorities of the New EngHsh Dictionary would 
 face the question. 
 
 ' Booh of Homage, p. 109, 
 
284 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 "Without attempting a statistic, either for Shakespeare, 
 with the Concordance, or for Chapman without one, I will 
 hazard my strong impression that Chapman's vocabulary 
 is considerably the larger of the two. I have been struck, 
 in studying the Concordance, by the large number of 
 ordinary Tudor words which are not to be found in it, and 
 by the large number which appear only once.' As hundreds 
 of these occur in plays which are wholly or partly in dispute, 
 the entire question is obviously in doubt. It really matters 
 little how the accurate statistic would stand ; but if we are 
 to have estimates on the subject they certainly ought to be 
 made with more concern for the comparative method than 
 has yet been shown. 
 
 As to Shakespeare's supposed coinages, we have it from 
 Dr. Bradley that " so far as the evidence goes, he may have 
 been the first user of the words changeful, gloomy, courtship, 
 also of cerements, illume, denote, depositary, impartial, 
 investment. It can hardly be supposed that Shakespeare 
 was the first writer to employ these words; but the fact 
 that no earlier examples can be quoted does show his 
 eagerness to avail himself of any useful innovations in 
 vocabulary." This is very judiciously put; but I will 
 confess to doubting whether the G-reat Dictionary, especially 
 in its earlier volumes, gives a widely trustworthy account of 
 first uses of words in the Tudor period. I have often mused 
 over its omissions.' 
 
 Changeful occurs only in Tboilus, and is very likely to 
 be Chapman's. Gloomy, in Shakespeare, appears first in 
 print in Ldcbecb, 803. But it occurs in two much-disputed 
 early plays, Titus Andeonicus, IV. i. 53 ; and 1 Hbnbt VI, 
 V. iv. 89, of which the first, in its present text, was cer- 
 tainly in existence before LtrcEBCB, and was printed early 
 
 ■ Compare The Baconicm Heresy, pp. 504-6, 512-17. 
 
 • It overlooka, for instance, Chapman's use of commercial in his first 
 yersion of B. II of the Iliad — probably written before 1593 ; and we have 
 seen that it gives an inadequate idea of the advent of the word real. No 
 less inadequate is its record of the uses of fortiiude. 
 
EPILOGUE 285 
 
 in the same year. It is safe to say that in its present form 
 it is mainly the work of Peele, Greene, and Marlowe ; and 
 that the same authors had a hand in 1 Henet VI. Further, 
 the word is found in Chapman's Shadow op Night 
 {Hymnits in Noctem, § 13, 6), which we know to have been 
 read by Marlowe in the early part of 1593. And Chapman 
 may possibly have had a revising hand in both Titus and 
 1 Hbnry VI. But Chapman is not the inventor. Spenser 
 has the word in the first Book of the Fabbib Queens, 
 canto V, stanza 2 — surely a well-known passage. But 
 neither is Spenser the inventor. The word occurs twice in 
 the "Ditty" in Greene's Pbbimbdbs the Blacksmith, 
 issued in 1588.' In the same poem, be it noted, we have 
 "canopy of clouds," whereas Dr. Bradley implies that 
 Shakespeare first applied " canopy " to the sky." I do not 
 suppose that Greene was the first to do so, or that he 
 invented "gloomy" ; but he certainly preceded Shakespeare 
 on both heads. Peele, too, has : " Under the starry canopy 
 of heaven " in 1593 (Honoub of the Gartbb, 1. 6). And 
 Chapman has " canopied with heaven " in his translation 
 of the tenth Iliad (185), which appeared in 1598 ; whereas 
 Shakespeare first uses " canopy " in this way in Hamlet. 
 
 Cerements {cerments in the FoUo) is a rather doubtful 
 word, never again occurring in Shakespeare ; but it may 
 very well be his invention. But it is otherwise with 
 courtship. Chapman, who uses the word very often, 
 certainly had it in print before Shakespeare : it occurs in 
 the CoBONET FOB His MiSTBBSS PHILOSOPHY (vi), pub- 
 lished in 1595 ; and I would earnestly urge upon the 
 Dictionary authorities that to secure priority for Shakespeare 
 by dating Lovb's Laboue's Lost 1588 is to commit them- 
 selves to a chronology that will not bear a moment's 
 investigation. Concerning the other words I am sceptical, 
 especially as to impartial, seeing that unpartial was current 
 
 ' Sae Dyoe'g Greens and Peals, p, W2h. 
 • Ai oited, p. 107. 
 
286 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 on the stage in the 'eighties at least. But these, I repeat, 
 are small matters ; and I owe too much to the Dictionary 
 to feel otherwise than dutifully towards its conductors. 
 Perhaps, in Centenary year, on this protestation, they will 
 forgivingly accept from me the information that " oneyers " 
 (1 Hbnby IV, II. i. 85), which, with the later commentators 
 in general, they declare to be an unexplained word, is 
 simply the old "wonniers" or " wonnyers " =inhabitants, 
 which they have doubtless noted in the Pbaxbe and 
 
 COMPLAINTE OF THE PlOWEMAN UNTO ChBISTB of the 
 
 fourteenth century, printed by Tyndale in 1531 and 
 reprinted in the first volume of the Harleian Miscellany; 
 also in Foxe's Acts and Monuments (ed. Gattley, 
 ii. 729). 
 
 The print of 1531 gives a short " Table " or glossary, 
 in which are included for explanation some words that 
 remained current in Shakespeare's day as apayed (appaid), 
 blive (belive), clepe, doom = judgment — even desert = wilder- 
 ness, and thraldom. Wonniers is explained as "Inhabi- 
 tauntes or Dwellers," with obvious correctness. It is simply 
 a noun from the verb to wonne. At the end of the first 
 paragraph we read : " For to [= until] that cyties ben 
 desolate withouten a wonnyer, and an house withouten 
 a man " ; and in the middle of the same paragraph we 
 have : " the erth ys infect of his wonnyers." Now, Foxe 
 in his reprint, though he notes that much of the language > 
 is obsolete, and glosses a number of words (the "Table" 
 being either lacking in his copy or dropped by him as 
 inadequate and in part unnecessary), does not gloss this, 
 whence we may infer that it was still current in his day. 
 " Great oneyers," then, is just " distinguished residents " ; 
 and here, at least, there has been no invention by Shake- 
 speare. The context of " nobility and tranquillity, 
 burgomasters and great oneyers," makes the matter clear 
 enough, I think. It was natural that when men pro- 
 nounced and spelt " great ones " as we still pronounce 
 
EPILOGUE 287 
 
 and spell, Shakespeare (or any contemporary) should spell 
 wonnyers " oneyers." He (or whoever wrote the speech) 
 had probably never seen the word printed. 
 
 The misgiving as to impairing Shakespeare's statistical 
 supremacy in words, then, is not one which appeals to me. 
 If Chapman, as I believe, greatly exceeded him in this 
 regard, there is no supremacy to save ; and in any case it 
 would not matter. Chapman's many words do not make 
 him a delightful artist, or a lord of memory : in his 
 comedies, where his dramatic art is happiest, he has no 
 great range of vocabulary. The question that really concerns 
 us under this head is just whether in the cases under notice, 
 or any of them. Chapman is the source of some of Shake- 
 speaxe's vocabulary. Having always proceeded inductively 
 in the inquiry, I may here venture to suggest that the 
 formation from the French of the word deracinate (which 
 the Baconians describe as a Latinism), one of the few 
 ostensibly first uses of words in the Shakespeare plays, and 
 one confined to Hbney V and Tboilus, is k priori more 
 likely to be by Chapman than by the actor, even though 
 he did lodge with a Frenchman. Chapman certainly read 
 French : he translated Qilles Durant ; he informs us that 
 he was accused of translating Homer through that tongue ; 
 and though he speaks of it with asperity, he is visibly 
 influenced by it, to the extent of making " discountried " 
 out of dSpaysS. Of course, if the student believes that 
 Shakespeare wrote the French scenes in Hbnbt V he 
 will stand up for the coinage of deracinate as Shake- 
 speare's. Those who would be thankful to know that 
 the mature Shakespeare did not desbend to such elemen- 
 tary trifling as that of the scenes in question may be 
 more open to the other view. Never having believed the 
 scenes to be his, I have no great difficulty in believing 
 they might be Chapman's, though I am not at all sure 
 of it. 
 
 The ultimate difficulty for many, I suppose, will be to 
 
288 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 accept the theory of a frequent collaboration or literary con- 
 tact between the two men, alongside of the theory that 
 Chapman had been the " rival poet " ; that Shakespeare made 
 fun of him in Love's Laboub's Lost ; and that Chapman had 
 snapped at such performances as the Venus and Adonis, not 
 on grounds of morahty — he was somewhat hopelessly barred 
 on that side — but on the score of commonness of theme 
 and "popularity" of treatment. Having for my own part 
 been, quite subconsciously, so long withheld by my very 
 behef in the early rivalry from detecting Chapman's hand 
 anywhere within the covers of Shakespeare, I can very 
 readily sympathize with objections on these grounds. But 
 I do not think that any one who knows Shakespeare well 
 need be long withheld by such a perplexity. When all is 
 said, Chapman was one of the most remarkable men of 
 letters of his time — the time of Shakespeare, Marlowe, and 
 Ben Jonson. In mere variety of energy and effort, mere 
 multiplicity of strenuous production, ranging from success- 
 ful comedy to cryptic and mystical poetry, he stands out 
 noticeably among his most distinguished contemporaries. 
 Having apparently no means of support after 1593 save 
 his pen, he contrived to produce his translations of the 
 Iliad, the Odyssey, and the rest of " Homer," and to give 
 them qualities of power and fire which make them to 
 this day magnetic. Such a man was worth helping. And 
 if I can see it after three hundred years, I really cannot 
 doubt that Shakespeare saw it all along. 
 
 Even if Chapman had ruffled him somewhat by his 
 pedantic asperities, he of all men best knew the human 
 struggle behind the "pasteboard portico," the weakness 
 underneath the shining armour of literary bravado. Chap- 
 man in one place lets us see how the pang of conscious 
 failure could strike through him in his wasteful battle with 
 the worldlings who baited and exasperated him. In the 
 Teabs of Peace, the impersonated Power addresses her 
 poet thus : 
 
EPILOGUE 289' 
 
 Thou wretched man whom I disoover, bom 
 To want and sorrow and the vulgar's aoom ; 
 Why haunt'st thou freely these unhaunted places 
 Empty of pleasures 1 empty of all graces . . . 
 
 adding the challenges : 
 
 Look'st ever upwards, and liv'st stiU beneath, 
 Fill'st all thy actions with strife what to think, 
 Thy brain with air, and scatter'st it in ink, 
 Of which thou mak'st weeds for thy soul to wear. 
 As out of fashion as the body's are. 
 
 To which the poet replies : 
 
 I grant their strangeness, and their too ill-grace 
 And too much wretchedness to bear the face 
 Of any likeness of my soul in them : 
 Whose instruments I rue with many a stream 
 Of secret tears for their extreme defects, — 
 
 making however a plea for his singularity. A man with 
 that side to him would not long be known to Shakespeare 
 without his discovering it ; and Shakespeare knew very well 
 the economic side of Elizabethan literary life, with its 
 procession of struggling authors, keeping the wolf from 
 the door by precarious plays. It was by plays that Chapman 
 had to boil his pot while laying his " great bases for 
 eternity " ; and he has told how his 
 
 enforced breach of the commandment to live without care of to-morrow 
 (which ever carries his confounded punishment with it) distracts inven- 
 tion, necessary even in translation, interrupts the industry of conceit, 
 «nd the discourse of the soul; 
 
 and how he found 
 
 " the flood and variety of my native language as it were dumbness, 
 fettered in my unhappy bosom ; and every comfort that might dissolve 
 and encourage it, utterly bereft me." ' 
 
 ' Epistle Dedicatory to Essex, with " Seven Books of the Iliad," 
 1598. 
 
 19 
 
290 SHAKESPEARE AND CHAPMAN 
 
 In another place he speaks of his " shaken brain " ; in yet 
 another of his tendency to fall into a state of trance ; and 
 many times he tells of his friendlessness in a world which 
 " ever took with the left hand what he gave with the right." 
 Shakespeare would not be slack to help a man so placed, if 
 appealed to. As he puts it in his own limpidly beautiful 
 lines : 
 
 The qnality of mercy is not strained, 
 
 It droppeth as the gentle ram from heaven 
 
 Upon the place beneath. 
 
 Above all, he had no artistic jealousy, herein transcending 
 alike Chapman and Jonson. 
 
 The help he gave by accepting collaboration, or drafts- 
 manship, from Chapman, if our theory be right, was often 
 an artistic tax. Timon, Pericles, Troilus, All's Well, 
 are all unsatisfactory plays, and Shakespeare must have 
 sighed over the tasks they imposed upon him. In comedy, 
 Chapman has real gifts, but little moral judgment and no 
 high charm ; and judgmeflt and charm are the two poles 
 of Shakespeare's comedy. The Shrew and the Errors, in 
 both of which we seem to see Chapman adapting the pre- 
 Shakespeareans, were journey-work, Shakespeare's share 
 in which would not much concern him ; and Henry V was 
 a show piece then, as now ; but he must have known that 
 all he could do would not make artistic successes of the 
 others, which challenged artistic success. 
 
 That he laid his hands on them, transmuting where he 
 touched, is the sum of our praise for them. If it can be 
 shown that any others of the later plays owe anything to 
 Chapman, whether in suggestion or invention, it would 
 be rather a comfort for Chapman's sake than a discomfort 
 for Shakespeare's — that is, if we rightly realize wherein lay 
 Shakespeare's greatness, and look to quality, not quantity. 
 If, for instance. Chapman can be shown to have had a share 
 in the Merry Wives, what does it matter to Shakespeare's 
 
EPILOGUE 291 
 
 fame ? Chapman, we know, could not create the Falstaff 
 of 1 Henry IV, any more than he could Hotspur; and 
 there is surely more tribute to Shakespeare in surmising 
 a weaker hand in the Mebry Wives than in accepting its 
 Falstaff as a Shakespearean failure. A number of word- 
 clues point to this solution ; ' and on general grounds it is 
 safe to say that the humours of Dr. Caius and Sir Hugh 
 and Mine Host, to say nothing of the buck-basket, are much 
 more like Chapman than Shakespeare ; even as are the 
 unsavoury prose parts of Measure for Measure, which 
 so notably recall the similar scenes in Pericles. That the 
 rhymed octosyllabics at the end of Act III of Measure 
 FOR Measure are not Shakespeare's must have been felt 
 by many readers; and these lines again recall the short 
 rhyming measures of Pericles. 
 
 But enough of critical contingencies. The immediate 
 issue is as to whether Chapman does enter into certain 
 of the inferior plays as above suggested ; and it is upon this 
 problem that criticism must or should first concentrate. 
 Let us get first at the main literary facts, and the 
 contingencies will settle themselves. 
 
 I Compare, for instance, " egress and regress " (II. i. 225) with All 
 Fools, TV. i. 287, 317. Neither word occurs elsewhere in Shakespeare. 
 Among the other word-clues are v/nmeaaurahle, predorrvmate, gnwum, 
 ramacked, emulate, larded, enrobed, expreasure, embroidery, charaetery. 
 As for the verse, did Shakespeare write IV. iii. 34 ? 
 
GENERAL INDEX 
 
 Acheson, A., 13 sq., 99, 101, 
 
 107 sq., Ill, 116 
 Achilles, 202 sq. 
 Adams, J. Q., 129 n. 
 AetioD, 118 sq. 
 Agamiemnon, 195 sq. 
 All's Well that End» Well, 267, 
 
 262 sq. 
 Amorous Zodiac, The, 102, 109 
 Anacreon, 177 
 
 Baoonists, the, 66 sq., 283 
 
 Beaumont, 210 sq. 
 
 Bentley, 243 
 
 Blind Beggar of Alexandria, 103, 
 
 239, 261 
 Bodenstedt, F., 181 ra. 
 Bond, Prof., 233 sq., 236 
 Bradley, Dr. H., 175, 283 sq. 
 
 Prof.A. 0., 264n. 
 
 Brangwyn, 59 
 Bntler, S., 9ji., 13 n. 
 
 CcBsa/r amd Pompey, 222 sq. 
 Chambrun, Comtesse, 110 n. 
 Chapman, the "rival poet," 14 sq., 
 19 
 
 birthplace of, 15 
 
 in the Complcdnt, 20 sq. 
 
 learning of, 117 
 
 on the horse, 22 sq. 
 
 style of, 26 sq., 74, 104 
 
 on pronunciation, 112 
 
 poems of, 28, 113 
 
 on Jonson, 28, 192 
 
 poetry of, 30, 288 
 
 poverty of, 102, 289 
 
 syntax of, 44 sq., 100 n, 
 
 ideals of, 100, 108 sq. 
 
 Chapman, false rhymes of, 49 
 
 vocabulary of, 54 sq., 283 
 
 pedantry of, 100 sq., 112 
 
 attitude of, to Shakespesure's 
 
 poems, 100 sq. 
 method of, in tragedy, 129, 
 
 131 sq., 201 
 studied French, 102, 170-1, 
 
 287 
 versification of, 174 sq., 199, 
 
 239 
 
 hand of, in Timon, 123 sq. 
 
 in Pericles, 185 sq. 
 
 in Troilus, 193 sq. 
 
 apparent traces of, in Tempest 
 
 masque, 210 sq. 
 
 in Hamlet interludes, 215 sq. 
 
 in CymbeUne interlude, 218 
 
 in Julius Ccesair, 221 sq. 
 
 in the Shrew, 226 sq. 
 
 in Henry VI, 239 sq. 
 
 in Henry V, 247 sq., 287 
 
 in the Errors, 257 sq. 
 
 in the Two Gentlemen, 261 
 
 in All's Well, 262 sq. 
 
 early work of, 237, 261 
 
 on astronomy, 241 
 
 eminence of, 288 
 
 trials of, 288 sq. 
 
 Chaucer, 281 
 
 Chettle, 195, 199, 201, 203, 275, 
 
 280 
 Coleridge on CymbeUne, 218 
 
 on All's Well, 263 
 
 CoUins, Prof. Churton, 205 
 Comedy of Errors, 173, 257 sq. 
 Complaint of Bosannond, The, 108 
 Coronet for his Mistress Philo- 
 sophy , A, 102 
 
294 
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 Gressida, 281, 282 
 Cunningham, Lt.-Col., 27 n. 
 CymbeUne, 218 
 
 Daniel, S., 19 to., 26, 103 
 
 Davies, Sir J., 205 
 
 Deighton, K., cited, 123, 125, 174 n., 
 
 200 sq. 
 Dekker, 195, 201, 203, 241, 244, 
 
 247, 248, 280 
 Delius, 128 
 Dido, 215 
 Double-endings, 173 sq., 223, 243, 
 
 250, 252, 257, 259, 262, 265 
 Downfall and Death of Bobert 
 
 Ea/rl of HvmUngdon, 199 
 Drayton, 14 sq., 18 sq., 119 
 Du Bartas, on the horse, 23 
 Durant, Gilles, 102, 287 
 
 Edward I, 248, 250 
 Edwanrd II, 246, 250 
 Edward III, 243, 246, 250 
 Elton, Prof., 119 
 Essex, 202 n., 248 
 
 Fairfax, 198 
 Falstaff, 291 
 Fojnous Victories of Henry the 
 
 Fifth, 246 
 Farmer, 110, 177 
 Fleay, on the rival poet, 17 sq. 
 
 on phrase tests, 59 
 
 on " Aetion," 119 
 
 on Tvmon, 123 sq. 
 
 on Pericles, 186 
 
 on Troilma, 193 sq., 197, 
 
 199 
 
 on masque in Tempest, 210 
 
 on players' scene in Hamlet, 
 
 215 
 
 on Julius CcBsar, 220 sq. 
 
 on the Shrew, 226 sq. 
 
 on"Doron,"236 
 
 on Eoses scene, 243 
 
 on Talbot scenes, 243 
 
 on Dekker, 244 
 
 on All's Well, 262 
 
 Fleay, on Love's Labour, 263 
 Florio, 110 
 Foie, 204, 286 
 
 Glaucus and Scilla, 108 
 Greene, 117, 118, 228, 243, 257, 261, 
 275, 285 
 
 in the Shrew, 235 
 
 in Henry VI plays, 239, 240 
 
 sq. 
 
 in the Errors, 257 sq. 
 
 in the Two Gentlemen, 259 
 
 in All's Well, 262 sq. 
 
 Guevara, on the horse, 23 sq. 
 
 Hamlet, players' scene in, 215 
 
 play-within-play in, 216, 266 
 
 Hardy, A., 278 
 
 Harriotts, 68 re., 106 re. 
 
 Hart, H., 239 sq., 243, 244 
 
 Harvey, G., 14, 248 
 
 Henry VI trilogy, 239 sq. 
 
 Henry V, 246 sq., 290 
 
 Henry VIII, 68 n., 234 
 
 Henry, Prince, 11 
 
 Herford, Prof., 193 
 
 Hero and Leander, 13, 32, 50, 
 
 92 sq., 100 
 Heywood, 123, 243 re., 244 
 Histriomastix, 196 
 Holofernes, original of, 107, 110 
 
 sq. 
 Horse, the ideal, 22 sq. 
 Hume, Major M., 118 
 
 Jonson, on the horse, 25 n. 
 
 Timonism in, 123 
 
 vocabulary of, 75, 151, 255, 
 
 283 
 
 on Pericles, 191-2 
 
 on Shakespeare, 220 
 
 and Julius Ccesar, 220 sq., 
 
 223-5 
 
 on Adonis' gardens, 243 
 
 Julius Ccesar, 220 sq. 
 
 Kleist, H. von, 278 
 Kyd, 236-7, 245, 275 
 
GENERAL INDEX 
 
 295 
 
 Lee, Sir S., on A Lover's Com- 
 plaint, 9 sq. 
 Le Sage, 278 
 
 Lodge, 96, 59, 103, 227, 236-7 
 Lope de Vega, 278 
 Lover's Complaint, A, 9 sq., 21 sq. 
 
 vocabulary of, 58 sq. 
 
 style of, 104 
 
 Love's Labour'^ Lost, 107 sq., 195 
 
 date of, 113, 285 
 
 Love's Labour's Won, 263 
 Luce, M., 214 
 
 Macbeth, 249 n., 255 
 
 Mackail, Prof., on A Lover's Com- 
 plaAnt, 9 sq., 21 sq. 
 
 on the sonnets, 10 
 
 Macmillan, M., 221, 222 n., 223 
 
 Mapes, 24 
 
 Markham, G., 17 sq. 
 
 Marlowe, 13, 15, 26, 27 n., 50, 73, 
 8071., 139, 215, 227, 236 sq., 239, 
 248, 244, 252, 274 
 
 Marston, 94, 123, 275 
 
 Masques of Beaumont and Chap- 
 man, 210 sq. 
 
 Mea^surefor Measure, 262, 291 
 
 Meres, 226 
 
 Merry Wives of Windsor, The, 
 290 
 
 Middleton, 249 
 
 MUton, 243 
 
 vocabulary of, 288 
 
 Minto, Prof., 10, 13 
 
 Molidre, 277 sq. 
 
 Miiller, Max, 288 
 
 Munday, 199, 228, 271 
 
 Nashe, 236, 243 
 
 Othello, rhymed speeches in, 216 
 Ovid, 213 
 
 Ovid's Banquet of Sense, 19, 50, 
 99 sq., 102 
 
 Parrott, Prof., 68, 82, 168, 281 
 Patient Grissel, 226 sq. 
 Peacock, Bishop, 75 
 
 Peele, 49, 59, 218, 239, 247, 248, 249,, 
 
 261, 275, 285 
 Perez, Don Antonio, 113 
 Pericles, 185 sq. 
 Philip, John, 228 
 PhilUs amd Flora, 24 sq. 
 Phrase teats, 58 sq. 
 Plato, 206 
 Prologues, 246 sq. 
 
 Kaleigh, 11 
 
 Bape of Lucrece, The, 21, 26, 99, 
 
 103 sq., 110 
 Bevenge of Honour, 82 
 Bichard III, Marlowe in, 274 n. 
 Bhymes, false, 49 sq. 
 Ehyme-teat, 195, 263 
 " Rival poet," the, 10, 14 sq. 
 Ronsard, 12, 177 
 Rowley, 186 
 
 Sainte-Beuve, cited, 277 sq. 
 
 Scribe, 277, 271 
 
 Seja/nus, 279t 
 
 Shadow of Night, The, 14, 25, 49, 
 
 99 sq. 
 Shakespeare, sonnets of, 10 sq. 
 
 on the horse, 23 sq. 
 
 imitations by, 23, 103 
 
 style of, 26, 276 
 
 facility of, 103, 282 
 
 relation of, to Chapman, 106, 
 
 116, 118, 120, 128, 291 
 
 greatness of, 275 
 
 not a plot-maker, 277 
 
 not a leisured artist, 279 
 
 blank verse of, 282 
 
 vocabulary of, 282 sq. 
 
 sympathy of, 288 
 
 without jealousy, 116, 290 
 
 Sidney, 111 
 
 Simpson, B., on once-used wordSi. 
 
 233 sq. 
 Sir Giles Goosecap, 68 
 Southampton, Lord, 18 sq., 116 
 Southern, 177 
 
 Spenser, 49, 118, 221 n., 243, 28& 
 " Split infinitive," 76 
 
296 
 
 GENEKAL INDEX 
 
 Stapleton, B., 24 sq. 
 Steevens, 214 to., 279 sq. 
 Surrey, 39 to., 49 to. 
 Sylvester, 23 sq. 
 
 Talents, in Timon, 132 sq. 
 
 Taming of the Shrew, 226 sq. 
 
 Taming of A Shrew, 227 sq., 236 
 
 Tarleton, 246 
 
 Tears, Chapman on, 141 
 
 Tempest, masque in, 210 
 
 Tieck on All's Well, 262 
 
 Timon of Athens, 123 sq. 
 
 Timon, the " academic," 134 sq. 
 
 Toumeur, 123 
 
 Troihis and Cressida, 193 sq. 
 
 prologue to, 247 
 
 Two Qentlemen of Verona, The, 
 257, 259 sq. 
 
 Upton, 214 n. 
 
 Venus and Adonis, 99 sq., 102, 
 
 109, 288 
 Verplanck, cited, 123, 200 
 Verse-tests, 173 sq. 
 Virgil, on the horse, 23 sq. 
 Vision, Chapman's theory oi, 73, 
 
 86, 241 
 Vocabulary tests, 56 sq. 
 Voltaire, on Moliere, 278 
 
 Walker, Sidney, 186 
 Warburton, 110 
 Ward, Dr. A. W., 9 TO. 
 Webster, 275 
 White, B. G., 200 sq., 205 
 
 on All's Well, 262 
 
 Wilkins, G., 186 
 
 Words, once-used, 233 sq. 
 
 Wright, Dr. E. H., 128 sq. 
 
 Xenophon, on the horse, 23 sq. 
 
INDEX OF WORDS CITED' 
 
 ABC, 260 
 Able, 15, 147, 159 
 Aecomplishment, 253 
 Acture, 51, 80, 217 
 Aetion, 118 
 AfEEkirs, 249 n. 
 Affectedly, 51, 76 
 Aloes, 51, 79 
 Amplify, 54, 90 
 Annexions, 51, 54, 77 sq. 
 Antidote, 149, 169 
 Antiquary, 207 
 Apparently, 258 
 Apperil, 146, 171, 255 n 
 Appertainings, 51 
 Applications, 271 
 Approaches, 150, 169 
 Approachers, 149 
 Armoury, 231 
 Artist, 190 
 Aspire, 127, 188 
 Assubjugate, 207-8 
 Auditor, 147 
 Austere, 127, 171 
 Authentic, 269 
 Authorized, 61 
 
 Basin, 233 
 
 Beastly, 171 
 
 Bed -right, 211, 213 
 
 Begnawn, 231 
 
 Bellows, 187 
 
 Beneath (adj.), 145, 154 
 
 Benign, 190 
 
 Benumbed, 207-8 
 
 Betrims, 211 
 
 Blend, 51 
 Bloods, 178, 259 
 Bluster, 150, 169 
 Blusters, 79, 169 
 Blusterer, 51, 79 
 Bosky, 211, 214 
 Brims, 211, 213 
 Brine, 72, 264 
 Brokers, 91 
 
 Broom-grooves, 211, 213 
 Browny, 33, 51, 79 
 Bungle, 253 
 Burnet, 252 
 
 Caged, 52 
 Caked, 148, 170 
 Canopy, 285 
 Capable, 115 
 Capricoios, 270 
 Captious, 264 
 Carcanet, 258 
 Carper, 149, 170 
 Carriage, 68 
 Cassock, 270 
 Castigate, 149, 168 
 Cauldron, 249 n. 
 Cautel, 54, 92 
 Cauterizing, 150 
 Ceased, 147, 161, 171, 228 
 Cerements, 285 
 Ceremonial, 230 
 Changeful, 207, 284 
 Chapraen, 118 
 Characters, 35 
 Charactery, 291 
 Characterless, 207 
 
 ' On pp. 54-5, 77, will be found lists of examples of Chapman's 
 characteristic word-formations. 
 
298 
 
 INDEX OF WORDS CITED 
 
 Charmed, 52, 85 
 
 Chequins, 190 
 
 Chine, 231 
 
 Circular, 93, 181 
 
 Coagulate, 217 
 
 Coat, 52, 53 
 
 Coffin, 232 
 
 Cogitations, 223 
 
 Coherent, 271 
 
 Collateral, 264 
 
 Colossus, 221 
 
 Comma, 126 
 
 Commercial, 284 n. 
 
 Commix, 54, 92 
 
 Commixtion, 207-8 
 
 Composture, 150, 170 
 
 Concave, 53, 92, 223 
 
 Concavities, 254 
 
 Conceptions, 149, 170 
 
 Conduce, 207-8 
 
 Confectionary, 149, 168 
 
 Confluence, 127, 145, 153, 171 
 
 Congest, 51 
 
 Congreeted, 252 
 
 Conjured, 127, 171 
 
 Constringed, 207, 209 
 
 Contain, 232 
 
 Continuate, 127, 145, 153 
 
 Contriver, 249 n. 
 
 Contumelious, 149, 169, 171, 242 
 
 Convive, 207 
 
 Cope, 190 
 
 Corporate, 147, 162 
 
 Corresponsive, 206 
 
 Cost, 52, 53 
 
 Coulter, 252 
 
 Counterpoints, 230 
 
 Courtship, 284-5 
 
 Crescive, 253 
 
 Crisp, 212, 214 
 
 Crooked, 33, 34, 218 n„ 248 
 
 Cuff, 230, 242 
 
 Curls, 33 
 
 Currance, 252 
 
 Decimation, 150, 170 
 Deck, 229 
 Declined, 215 
 
 Deedless, 207-8 
 
 Defeature, 258 
 
 Defunction, 253 
 
 Defused, 252 
 
 Degrees, 224 
 
 Deified, 84, 63 
 
 Dejected, 188 
 
 Delightsome, 219 
 
 Demonstrative, 253 
 
 Denote, 284 
 
 Depositary, 284 
 
 Deprave, 146, 159 
 
 Deracinate, 287 
 
 Descant, 260 
 
 Detention, 147, 162 
 
 Dejcter, 207-8 
 
 Dialect, 62 
 
 Dialogue (vb.), 93, 123, 147, 162, 
 
 171, 174 
 Dich, 146 
 Directive, 207-8 
 Disannul, 257 
 Disoipled, 264 
 Disciplines, 254 
 Disorbed, 207, 209 
 Distract, 52, 89 
 Divide, 35, 71 
 Dividant, 148, 170 
 Donation, 212 
 Down (n.), 33 
 Drift, 127 
 Dusky, 213 
 
 Embalms, 148, 165 
 Embossed, 271 
 Embowelled, 265 
 Embrasure, 207 
 Embroidery, 291 
 Emulate, 291 
 Emulous, 207-8 
 Enacted, 240 
 Enacture, 217 
 Encrimson'd, 51, 81 
 Ender, 51, 79 
 Enforcedly, 149, 170 
 Englutted, 171 
 Enpatron, 51, 79 
 Enrank, 240 
 
INDEX OF WORDS CITED 
 
 299' 
 
 Enrapt, 207-8 
 Enrobed, 291 
 Ensear, 149, 170 
 Enswath'd, 51, 77 
 Entranced, 190 
 Enwombed, 264 
 Erection, 149, 167 
 Erudition, 207-8 
 Eteme, 215 
 Ewer, 148, 164, 229 
 Exclude, 259 
 Executors, 254 
 Exceptless, 150, 170, 178 
 Excrement, 171, 258 
 Exempt, 138, 258 
 Exhaust, 149, 166,^71, 176 
 Expectance, 207-8 
 Expecters, 207 
 Expectless, 178 
 Expostulation, 207-8 
 Expressure, 291 
 Extincture, 51, 54, 79 
 Eyesore, 230 
 
 Fallows, 253 
 Fang (vb.), 148, 170 
 Fastly, 51, 79 
 Fellies, 215 
 Fickle, 52, 53, 82 
 Fiction, 171 
 Filcheries, 170 
 Fisnomy, 272 
 Flamen, 149, 166 
 Fluent, 254 
 Fluxive, 51, 76 sq. 
 Forbod, 51, 80 
 Fortitude, 243 n., 284 n. 
 Foughten, 254 
 Fracted, 147, 162, 254 
 Fractions, 148, 162 
 Fragile, 150, 170 
 Freckled, 252 
 Furrow (n.), 211, 213 
 
 Gamut, 230 
 Giglot, 244 
 GUt, 249 
 Gimmors, 241 
 
 Glass-fac'd, 146, 170 
 Gloomy, 284-5 
 Gnawn, 291 
 Gouty, 148, 165, 176 
 Gratulate, 171, 219 
 Grave (vb.), 149, 167, 171 
 Greases, 149, 152 
 Guardant, 244 
 Gules, 216 
 
 Habitude, 51, 77 
 Hail, 66 
 
 Hammering, 260 
 Hand, 79, 143 
 Hanging, 176 
 Heaps, 171, 187 
 Hell, 28, 29 
 Hereditary, 176 
 High-vio'd, 176 
 Hinge, 149, 170 
 Hoar (vb.), 149 
 Home-groves, 213 
 Housed, 258 
 Hug, 171, 223 
 Humidity, 148 
 Hungerly, 231 
 Hydra-headed, 252 
 Hyperion, 152 
 
 Icarus, 244 
 Idolatrous, 264 
 lUume, 284 
 Imbecility, 267 
 Immaterial, 207 
 Imminence, 207 
 Impartial, 285 
 Impasted; 215 
 Impleach'd, 51, 81 
 Importune, 171 
 Impress, 52, 87 
 Incessant, 259 
 Incomparable, 231 
 Incredible, 280 
 Indigent, 252 
 Indistinguishable, 207-8 
 Ingenious, 53, 115, 163, 229 
 Ingeniously, 148, 162, 171 
 Ingenuous, S3, 163 
 
300 
 
 INDEX OF WORDS CITED 
 
 Inquisitive, 257, 259 
 Insculpture, 150, 170 
 Insisture, 207, 209 
 Institute, 229 
 Intellectual, 254, 258 
 Intenible, 265 
 Investment, 284 
 Inveigle, 207-8 
 Invis'd, 51, 76 
 Invoke, 253 
 Inwards, 41 
 Ivory, 127, 141 sq. 
 
 Jeweller, 145, 154, 270 
 Junkets, 231 
 Jutting, 147 
 
 Kecksies, 252 
 Kestrel, 117 
 
 Lank, 216 
 Larded, 291 
 Leas, 212 
 Legerity, 255 n. 
 Linstock, 242 
 Liquorish, 149, 152, 167 
 Litigious, 189 
 Lorn, 211 
 Lover'd, 51, 78 
 
 Maculation, 207 
 Mad-brain'd, 171, 231 
 Maintain, 240 
 Malecontent, 260 
 Marbled, 149, 152, 167 
 Marge, 211 
 Mast, 149, 169 
 Mastic, 207, 209 
 Mastie, 209 
 Maund, 32, 51, 76 
 Mathematics, 230 
 Metaphysics, 230 
 Mickle, 244 
 Multitudinous, 255 
 Musics, 271 
 Mood, 52, 53 
 Mountant, 149, 166 
 
 Nave, 215 
 
 Oathable, 149, 171 
 Oblique,il48, 165 
 Occasion, 52, 53, 82 
 Ominous, 215 
 Oneyers, 286 
 Operant, 217 
 Oppugnancy, 207 
 Opulency, 150 
 Orbed, 93, 217 
 Ostent, 187 
 Outside, 125, 165 
 Outsides, 148 
 Outward-B, 36, 39, 189 
 
 Paled (=pamd), 51, 81 
 
 Paradox, 127 
 
 Parcels, 52, 53 
 
 Parsley, 232 
 
 Particular, 39, 42, 127, 264 
 
 Particularly, 127, 145, 156 
 
 Pash, 207-8 
 
 Pastern, 253 
 
 Patchery, 150, 170 
 
 Pax, 253 
 
 Pedascule, 230 
 
 Pedigree, 253 
 
 PeUeted, 54 
 
 PensiVd, 51 
 
 Penurious, 149, 166 
 
 Period (vb.), 170 
 
 Perpetually, 191, 230, 270 
 
 Persistive, 207-8 
 
 Personate, 141 sq., 146, 158 
 
 Perspicuous, 207-8 
 
 Philosophical, 271 
 
 Phoenix, 52, 82 
 
 Phraseless, 51, 54, 78 
 
 Pieced, 54, 92 
 
 Pittance, 232 
 
 Plaintful, 51, 78 
 
 Plash, 229 
 
 Plenitude, 51 
 
 Pomp, 171 
 
 Precedent, 21, 26, 65 
 
 Precedent, 67, 171 
 
 Predominate, 149, 291 
 
INDEX OF WORDS CITED 
 
 301 
 
 Preferr'd, 171 
 Prejudicates, 264 
 Presentment, 145, 153, 171 
 Presumption, 270 
 Propagate, 146, 157, 171 
 Propension, 207 
 Properties (vb.), 146, 170 
 Propugnation, 207 
 Protraotive, 207-8 
 Punched, 245 
 Pursy, 150 
 
 Back, 215 
 
 Radiance, 52, 86, 264 
 
 Bampired, 150, 169, 171, 219 
 
 Bansacked, 291 
 
 Rapt, 127, 171, 180, 208 
 
 Rapture, 188 
 
 Bays, 241 
 
 Beal, 94, 270, 284 n. 
 
 Becanter, 150 
 
 Becoverable, 148, 164 
 
 Bector, 272 
 
 Reduce, 252 
 
 Begular, 150, 170 
 
 Bejoindure, 207 
 
 Belapse, 191, 254 
 
 Reliances, 147 
 
 Bemotion, 149, 168 
 
 Render (n.), 150, 169 
 
 (vb.), 265 
 
 Replications, 223 
 Repugnancy, 148, 170 
 Bepugnant, 215 
 Bepured, 207, 209 
 Beword, 53, 92 
 Bim, 254 
 Bivage, 247 
 Bivelled, 207 
 Bother, 148 
 Round, 188 
 Ruby, 81 
 Rudesby, 231 
 Ruffle, 232 
 Buffling, 232 
 Bye-straw, 211 
 
 Sable, 215 
 
 Sacrificial, 143-4, 146 
 
 Sapphire, 259 
 
 Satiety, 171, 229 
 
 Savagery, 252 
 
 Sawn, 51, 80 
 
 Scandal'd, 212, 223 
 
 Scarcity, 212 
 
 Scope, 146, 158, 171, 217 
 
 Seafarer, 190 
 
 Sea-faringj 259 
 
 Seaman, 191 
 
 Sear'd, 30, 43 
 
 Season (vb.), 264 
 
 Sedged, 211 
 
 Self (compounds), 72 
 
 Shameless, 259 
 
 Sheav'd, 51, 78 
 
 Shipboard, 259 
 
 Shipwrack, 190, 253 
 
 Sicklemen, 211 
 
 Silken, 53 
 Similes, 52 
 Sistering, 51, 81, 185 
 Sleided, 51, 185 
 Sleights, 249 n. 
 Smeared, 215 
 Softness, 150, 169 
 Soilure, 207 
 Solidares, 148, 171 
 Sonance, 251 
 Sorrow'd, 150 
 Spangled, 171 
 Sphere, 146, 157, 264 
 Sphered, 207-8 
 Spices (vb.), 148, 165 
 Spokes, 215 
 Spongy, 67, 215 
 Spousal, 252 
 Steepy, 146, 170 
 Sternage, 247 
 Stocks, 230 
 Stoics, 230 
 Storming, 37, 52, 83 
 Stover, 211 
 Streamers, 247 
 Stuck, 35, 36, 171, 216 
 Studs, 230 
 Studded, 233 
 
302 
 
 INDEX OF WORDS CITED 
 
 Subduements, 207 
 Sucking, 251 
 Sufferance, 171 
 Suffering, 52, 88 
 Suit, 52, 53 
 Sunburnt, 212, 253 
 Supplicant, 51, 79 
 Swart, 259 
 Swath, 149 
 Sweep, 146 
 
 Talents, 52, 132 sq. 
 Tellus, 217 
 Tendance, 146, 156 
 Tennis, 189 
 Termless, 51, 54, 79 
 Thievery, 170 
 Threaden, 78, 247 
 Thunderstocks, 218 n. 
 Thunderstone, 218, 219 
 Topless, 207, 219 
 Torcher, 265 
 Tortive, 207 
 Tract, 124, 145, 156 
 Transcend, 207-8 
 Transcendence, 269 
 Translating, 143 
 Transmutation, 232 
 Traversed, 150, 169 
 Trenchant, 149, 170 
 Trim, 188, 215 
 Trustible, 171 
 Turfy, 211, 214 
 Turncoats, 149, 170 
 TwiUed, 211, 213 
 
 Unaptness, 147, 162 
 Unolew, 146, 159 
 Unoomprehensive, 207-8 
 Unctuous, 149, 152, 168 
 Unexperienced, 231 
 Unexperient, 51, 76 
 Unmeasurable, 149, 152, 167, 291 
 Unpeaceable, 146, 170 
 Unshrubb'd, 211, 214 
 Unspeakable, 259 
 Untirable, 145, 170 
 Untuck'd, 51, 77 
 Usuring, 148, 165, 178 
 
 Vaporous, 249 n. 
 
 Verbal, 270 
 
 Vestments, 149, 166, 176, 258 
 
 Vetches, 211 
 
 Vindicative, 207 
 
 Violenteth, 207 
 
 Voiced, 149 
 
 Wafts, 141, 143, 258 
 Wappened, 148, 170 
 Weepingly, 61, 79 
 Whiffler, 249 
 Whittle, 150, 170 
 Windpipe, 145, 156, 254 
 Windring, 211 
 Windsucker, 117 
 Womby, 251 
 Wonniers, 286 
 Workmanly, 233 
 Worthless-of, 225 
 Wreakful, 149, 168, 171, 219 
 
INDEX OF PHRASES CITED 
 
 Above a mortal pitch, 16 
 Adonis' gardens, 242| 
 Affable familiar ghost, 14, 18 
 Always wind-obeying deep, 259 
 Axle-tree of heaven, 206 
 
 Bases for eternity, 11-12 
 Bear me hard, 224 
 Blood and mind, 21, 26, 
 264 
 
 Canopy of heaven, 285 
 Carry coals, 254 
 Circles in the water, 242 
 Come home to you, 224 
 Cooling card, 59 
 
 Dance attendance, 68 n. 
 Deep-drawing barks, 247 
 Despair and die, 245 
 Divine instinct, 59 
 Double double, 249 n. 
 
 Egress and regress, 291 
 Eye seeing not itself, 205 
 
 Fiery torcher, 263 
 Fire damimed up, 260 
 Flower and stalk, 30 
 Football to spurn, 258 
 Full proud sail, 14, 17 
 
 Gordian knot, 252 
 Gum which oozes, 124 n. 
 
 Hatch'd in silver, 206 
 Heavenly familiar, 14 
 Hell of witchcraft, 28 sq. 
 Her deity, 214 
 Household words, 256 
 Hydra-headed, 252 
 
 69, 
 
 Ivory hand, 141 sq. 
 
 Kill'd with kindness, 228 
 
 Mad, mistaking eyes, 232 
 Many-oolour'd messenger, 212 
 Marbled mansion, 167 
 Mars his true moving, 240 
 Mastic jaws, 209 
 
 Pitch, Above a mortal, 16 
 Port of Mars, 248 
 Put out eye, 73 
 
 Quality and kind, 224 
 
 Bazor of Palermo, 59 
 Beach at stars, 260 
 Eoses washed in dew, 237 
 Bubies red as blood, 81 
 
 Sandy plains, 59 
 
 Sea of air, 130 
 
 Season'd with tears, 72, 264 
 
 Shake-spear, 196 sq. 
 
 Sleided silk, 185 
 
 Spirit of sense, 205 
 
 Stuck . . . with flatteries, 171 
 
 Sucking of a gulf, 251 
 
 Swift as thought, 247 
 
 Tender tinder, 115 
 
 Understanding soul, 256 
 Unlaid-ope, 188 
 
 Wafts to her, 141 
 Wallet of Time, 204 
 Wed the second, 217-218 
 Well I wot, 244 
 Womby vaultages, 251 
 
 303 
 
Printed in Oreat Britain by 
 
 UNWIN EBOTHEBS, IJUITED 
 WOEINQ Aim IXIKDON