Part 1

Transcriber's note

Variable, archaic or unusual spelling and punctuation have been retained apart from minor punctuation inconsistencies which have been silently corrected. A list of other changes made can be found at the end of the book. Line numbers and sidenotes are placed within [square brackets].

For this text version, text in superscript is placed within curly brackets preceded by a carat character like ^{this}. Diacritical marks that cannot be represented in plain text are shown in the following manner:

[=a] a with macron Ligature [oe] is encoded as oe.

Mark up: _italics_

The Tudor Library.

NARCISSUS, A TWELFE NIGHT MERRIMENT.

_Five hundred copies of this Edition are printed._

A TWELFE NIGHT MERRIMENT.

ANNO 1602.

NARCISSUS

A TWELFE NIGHT MERRIMENT

PLAYED BY YOUTHS OF THE PARISH

AT

THE COLLEGE OF S. JOHN THE BAPTIST IN OXFORD, A.D. 1602

WITH APPENDIX

NOW FIRST EDITED FROM A BODLEIAN MS.

BY

MARGARET L. LEE OF S. HUGH'S HALL, OXFORD

LONDON

PUBLISHED BY DAVID NUTT IN THE STRAND

MDCCCXCIII

CHISWICK PRESS:--C. WHITTINGHAM AND CO., TOOKS COURT, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON.

INTERLOQUUTORES.

1. TYRESIAS. 2. CEPHISUS. 3. NARCISSUS. 4. DORASTUS. 5. CLINIAS. 6. ECCHO. 7. LYRIOPE. 8. FLORIDA. 9. CLOIS. 10. THE WELL. 11. PORTER.

PREFACE.

IN editing the hitherto unpublished play of _Narcissus_, together with the three speeches and the letter composed for Francis Clarke, porter of S. John's, I have retained throughout the very irregular spelling of the MS. The punctuation and use of capital letters have, however, been modernized, the contractions employed for _the_, _which_, _with_, _what_, and certain prefixes, expanded, and a few obviously scribal errors corrected in the text, the notes supplying in every such case the original MS. reading.

In bringing to its conclusion a work which now seems even less satisfactorily performed than I once hoped it might be, there is at least a pleasure in recording thanks to all those who have interested themselves on my behalf, and aided me with suggestions and criticisms, or--as in the case of the editors of the _N. E. D._--with valuable references. Indeed, were it not for the direct and indirect help of friends--and amongst those who have given me the former I must make special and grateful mention of Professor Ker, Professor Napier, and Mr. Madan--_Narcissus_ would have been left to find a worthier editor.

26, WARRINGTON CRESCENT, MAIDA HILL.

INTRODUCTION.

SECTION I. NARCISSUS.

THIS play, which for want of a ready-made title I have called _Narcissus_, dates from a period of peculiar interest in the history of that class of dramatic composition to which it belongs.

So vast a phenomenon as the rise and fall of the complete English drama could not but be attended by widely-spread symptoms of the popular love for stage representation; a tendency which, though it would never have produced a Shaksperian tragedy, yet alone rendered possible the work of a Shakspere. These lesser manifestations of the feeling that pervaded Elizabethan England may be compared to the small fissures on the side of a volcano, through which the same lava as fills the molten crater emanates in slender and perhaps hardly perceptible channels. It may chance that the activity of these side-streams presages the final eruption at the summit; yet afterwards they are scarcely noticed, and their effects are too puny to attract attention. So it is with the abortive forms of drama, heralding, accompanying, and in some cases outliving, the culmination of English dramatic art under Shakspere. They are not, as a rule, the product of those great intellects which helped in the rearing of the main structure; but rather of such lesser writers as were either possessed by the dramatic spirit while ignorant of the formative and restraining rules of art, or else imbued with a desire to follow those rules, as they had been drawn up by Aristotle and Horace and exemplified in French and Italian literature, whilst themselves wanting in originality, and oblivious of the superiority of a native growth over the best of importations. The latter class of would-be English dramatists, in especial, found a natural field for action amongst the scholarly societies which constituted a mediæval university. Though as early as 1584 and 1593 statutes are found enacting that no players shall perform within five miles of Oxford, it must be remembered that these refer to professional, not to academical actors, and that the regulations controlling the former were of much greater stringency than those which concerned the latter.

Nor were plays imitated from Greek and Latin writers the only ones to be performed by undergraduates and others before select audiences in the college halls. Youthful players would probably demand the introduction of something more or less witty; and the fact that theatrical representations generally took place on the occasion of a royal visit, or at times of special rejoicing, accounts in some degree for the casting aside of the strictly classical models, and the employment of masques, or of such looser forms of comedy as were the outcome of Heywood's _Interludes_, into either of which contemporary allusions and jests could be readily introduced. Nevertheless, the majority of such pieces continued to deal with subjects taken from Roman and Greek mythology, the various anachronisms and absurdities which arose from this method of treatment only contributing to heighten the amusement of the spectators.

I have already implied that _Narcissus_ belongs to the class of University plays, inasmuch as it was acted at S. John's College, Oxford, on Twelfth Night, 1602. It does not, however, approximate in any way to the classical form of comedy; it is rather to be regarded as a Christmas piece, an imitation of the Yule-tide mummeries acted by disguised villagers or townsfolk at the houses of such wealthier persons as would afford them hospitality.

The following list of Oxford plays--compiled, with additions, from W. L. Courtney's article in _Notes and Queries_ for December 11th, 1886, and W. Carew Hazlitt's _Manual of English Plays_--may be of interest, as showing the frequency of dramatic entertainments at the various colleges between 1547 and the Restoration. The dates appended are in most cases those of presentation; but when these are either unknown, or impossible to distinguish from dates of entry at Stationers' Hall, I have substituted the latter.

1547. _Archipropheta_, sive _Joannes Baptista_, by Nicholas Grimald, in Ch. Ch. Hall.

1566. _Marcus Geminus_, by (?) in Ch. Ch. Hall.

1566. _Palæmon and Arcyte_, by Richard Edwards, in Ch. Ch. Hall.

1566. _Ariosto_, by Geo. Gascoigne, at Trin. Coll.

1566. _Progne_, by Dr. James Calfhill, in Ch. Ch. Hall.

? 1580. _Ulysses Redux_, by William Gager, in Ch. Ch. Hall.

1581. _Meleager_, by William Gager, in Ch. Ch. Hall.

1582. _Supposes_, translated from Ariosto, by Geo. Gascoigne, at Trin. Coll.

1582. _Julius Cæsar_, by Dr. Geddes, in Ch. Ch. Hall.

1583. _Rivales_, by William Gager, in Ch. Ch. Hall.

1583. _Dido_, by William Gager, in Ch. Ch. Hall.

? _Tancred_, by H. Wotton, at Queen's Coll.

? _Kermophus_, by George Wild (?) at (?)

1591. _Kynes Redux_, by William Gager, in Ch. Ch. Hall.

1592. _Bellum Grammaticale_, sive _Nominum Verborumque Discordia Civilis_, by (?) at Ch. Ch.

? 1602. _Hamlet_, by W. Shakspere, at (?).

1602. _Narcissus_, by (?) at S. John's College.

1605. _Ajax Flagellifer_, by (?) at (?).

1605. _Alba_, by (?) in Ch. Ch. Hall.

1605. _Vertumnus_, sive, _Annus Recurrens Oxonii_, by Dr. Matthew Gwinne, in Ch. Ch. Hall.

1606. _The Queen's Arcadia_, by Samuel Daniel, in Ch. Ch. Hall.

1607. _Cæsar and Pompey_, by (?) at Trin. Coll.

1607. _The Christmas Prince_, by divers hands, at S. John's Coll.

1608. _Yule-tide_, by (?) at Ch. Ch.

1614. _Spurius_, by Peter Heylin, at Hart Hall.

1617. _Technogamia_, by Barten Holiday, at Ch. Ch.

1617-8. _Philosophaster_, by R. Burton, at Ch. Ch.

1631. _The Raging Turk_, by Thomas Goffe, at Ch. Ch.

1632. _The Courageous Turk_, by Thomas Goffe, at Ch. Ch.

1633. _Fuimus Troes_, by Dr. Jasper Fisher, at Magd. Coll.

1633. _Orestes_, by Thomas Goffe, at Ch. Ch.

? 1634. _The Sophister_, by R. Zouch, at (?).

1634-5. _Euphormus_, sive, _Cupido Adultus_, by Geo. Wilde, at S. John's Coll.

1636. _Stonehenge_, by John Speed, at S. John's Coll.

1636. _The floating Island_, by William Strode, at Ch. Ch.

1636. _Love's Hospital_ (or, _The Hospital of Lovers_), by Geo. Wilde, at S. John's Coll.

1636. _The Royal Slave_, by William Cartwright, at Ch. Ch.

1637. _The Converted Robber_, by Geo. Wilde, at S. John's College.

? 1640. _Pharamus_, sive, _Libido Vindex_ (also published under the title of _Thibaldus_, sive _Vindictæ Ingenium_), by Thomas Snelling, at (?).

1648. _Stoicus Vapulans_, by (?) at S. John's Coll.

1648. _Amorous War_, by Jasper Maine, D.D., at (?).

? _The Scholar_, by Richard Lovelace, at Gloucester Hall. (Prologue and Epilogue appear in _Lucasta_, 1649.)

1651. _The Lady Errant_, by William Cartwright, at (?).

1653. _The Inconstant Lady_, by Arthur Wilson, at Trin. Coll. (?)

1654. _The Combat of Love and Friendship_, by Robt. Mead, at Ch. Ch.

1660. _The Christmas Ordinary_, by W. R., M.A., at Trin. Coll.

1660. _The Guardian_, by (?) at "new dancing-school against S. Michael's Church." (Wood, iii. 705.)

1663. _Flora's Vagaries_, by Richard Rhodes, at Ch. Ch.

This catalogue does not, of course, pretend to be exhaustive. An examination of the various college archives would doubtless afford further material. There exists, for instance, the record of performances at Merton; cf. G. C. Brodrick's _Memorials of Merton College_ (Oxford Hist. Soc., 1885), p. 67: "In January and February, 1566-7, two dramatic performances were given in the Warden's lodgings by members of the foundation ... the one being an English comedy, and the other Terence's _Eunuchus_.... Again, in 1568, a play of Plautus was acted in the hall."

It will be seen that of the above-mentioned plays six, besides _Narcissus_, were performed at the College of S. John the Baptist, the first recorded being the _Christmas Prince_ in 1607, the succeeding ones taking place after an interval of twenty-six years; and to these we should very probably add _Pharamus_, the writer of which, Thomas Snelling, "became Scholar of S. John's in 1633, aged 19, and afterwards fellow ... and was esteemed an excellent Latin poet." (Wood, _Ath. Ox._, vol. iii., p. 275.)

A passage from Wake's _Rex Platonicus_ (ed. 1, p. 18) is also worthy of note in this connection: "Quorum primos jam ordines dum principes contemplantur, primisque congratulantium acclamationibus delectantur, Collegium Diui Iohannis, nobile literarum domicilium (quod Dominus Thomas Whitus Prætor olim Londinensis, opimis reditibus locupletârat) faciles eorum oculos speciosæ structuræ adblanditione invitat; moxque et oculos & aures detinet ingeniosâ nec injucundâ lusiunculâ quâ clarissimus præses cum quinquaginta, quos alit Collegium studiosis, magnaque studentium conuiventium cateruâ prodeuns, principes in transitu salutandos censuit.

"Fabulæ ansam dedit antiqua de Regia prosapia historiola apud Scoto-Britannos celebrata, quæ narrat tres olim Sibyllas occurrisse duobus Scotiæ proceribus Macbetho & Banchoni, & illum prædixisse Regem futurum, sed Regem nullum geniturum, hunc Regem non futurum, sed Reges geniturum multos. Vaticinii veritatem rerum eventus comprobavit: Banchonis enim è stirpe Potentissimus Iacobus oriundus. Tres adolescentes concinno Sibyllarum habitu induti, è Collegio prodeuntes, & carmina lepida alternatim canentes, Regi se tres esse illas Sibyllas profitentur, quæ Banchoni olim Sobolis imperia prædixerant, jamque iterum comparere, vt eâdem vaticinij veritate prædicerent Iacobo, se iam, & diu regem futurum Britanniæ felicissimum & multorum Regum parentem, vt ex Banchonis stirpe nunquam sit hæres Britannico diademati defuturus. Deinde tribus Principibus suaves felicitatum triplicitates triplicatis carminum vicibus succinentes veniamque precantes, quòd alumni ædium Divi Iohannis (qui præcursor Christi) alumnos Ædis Christi (quo tum Rex tendebat) præcursoriâ hâc salutatione antevertissent, Principes ingeniosâ fictiunculâ delectatos dimittunt; quos inde vniversa astantium multitudo, felici prædictionum successui suffragans, votis precibusque ad portam vsque civitatis Borealem prosequitur."

* * * * *

The _Christmas Prince_ is, properly speaking, not a single play, but a collection of performances consequent on the revival of the old custom, left in abeyance since 1577, of choosing a prince, or master of the revels, who should exercise undisputed authority during the festive season, and in whose honour the company at large should indulge freely in various sorts of pastimes. The account given of this revival, in 1607, seems to imply that there had been of late years no Christmas festivities at S. John's. In 1602 the college porter, pleading for the admission of players on Twelfth Night, could say:

"Christmas is now at the point to bee past; 'Tis giving vp the ghost and this is the last; And shall it passe thus without life or cheere? This hath not beene seene this many a yeere."

Without laying too much stress upon a single allusion, it is safe to assert that the discovery of the comedy of _Narcissus_, played five years earlier than the performances of which an account is given in the _Christmas Prince_, must be of considerable interest in the history of S. John's, and indeed in that of Oxford play-acting generally.

The MS. containing this comedy is one of the Rawlinson collection, now in the possession of the Bodleian Library. The volume, which is 5½ × 4 inches in size, with 156 leaves, appears to have been the commonplace book of an Oxford man. It contains a variety of English poems and prose pieces, written at the end of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth century; amongst them several pages of extracts from the essays of Bacon and of his less-known contemporary Robert Johnson. Sir H. Wotton's poem, "How happy is he borne or taught," also finds a place in the collection. But the majority of the contents are of small literary value, and, so far as I am aware, have never been published. Perhaps the most interesting pieces in the volume are certain "English Epigrammes much like Buckminster's Almanacke ... calculated by John Davis of Grayes Inne ... 1594" of the character of which the following lines, occurring early in the series, may give some idea.

_Of a Gull._

"Oft in my laughinge rimes I name a gull, But this new tearme will many questions breed, Therefore at first I will describe at full Who is a true & perfect gull indeede.

"A gull is hee that weares a velvett gowne, And when a wench is brave dare not speake to her; A gull is hee that traverseth the towne, And is for marriage knowne a common wooer.

"A gull is hee that, when he proudly weares A silver hilted rapier by his side, Endures the lye and knocks about the eares, Whilst in his sheath his sleepinge sword doth bide.

"A gull is hee that hath good handsome cloaths, And stands in presence stroking vpp his haire, And fills vpp his imperfecte speech with oathes, But speaks not one wise woord throughout the yeere. But, to define a gull in tearms precise, A gull is hee that seemes, and is not, wise."

That the play now under consideration is the work of some member or members of the college of S. John's there can be no doubt. It is, as the Prologue affirms, "Ovid's owne Narcissus," _i.e._, the story of Narcissus as told in the third book of the _Metamorphoses_, which forms the basis of the plot; and the resemblance to the Latin is in parts so close as necessarily to imply a knowledge of that language on the part of the writer. There is, indeed, one passage of literal and yet graceful translation (see ll. 494-505) which especially betokens a scholarly hand.

But it has been already hinted that the chief interest of the comedy lies in another direction. The arrangement and methods are those of the rough-and-ready English stage of the period; and as in the Pyramus and Thisbe interlude of the _Midsummer Night's Dream_, and the Nine Worthies of _Love's Labour's Lost_, the writer imitates and ridicules that naïve realism which appertained to native comedy in its rude embryonic forms. The absurdities with which the _Narcissus_ abounds are obviously intentional; it is, in fact, a burlesque, not skilful nor humorous enough to take its place beside the immortal parodies of Shakspere, which in aim and scope it resembles, but a good average specimen of its class, doubtless provocative of intense delight in the minds of a contemporary audience. It is, of course, with a view to heightening the reality of the effect that the Porter is made to plead on behalf of certain "youths of the parish," who are waiting, armed with their wassail-bowl, for admittance into the hall, and who, besides a song, have "some other sporte too out of dowbt" for the delectation of the assembled guests. Then follows, first the song, and afterwards an altercation in prose between the Porter and the Players, who assume an air of bashfulness when called upon to exercise their dramatic talent. Finally, the Prologue enters, and the play is begun; the general smoothness of the versification standing out in contrast to the intentional doggerel of the Porter's introductory speech and epilogue.

The mention of "youths of the parish" is probably not serious; but as an allusion to a real play of the kind here imitated, the following extract from the _Christmas Prince_ (ed. 1816, p. 25) may be of interest: "S. Steevens day was past over in silence, and so had S. John's day also; butt that some of the princes honest neighbours of S. Giles presented him with a maske or morris, which though it were but rudely performed, yet itt being so freely & lovingly profered it could not but bee as lovingly received."

* * * * *

I shall now pass on to the consideration of the play itself, and, first, of the characters which make up the list of _dramatis personæ_. Five of these, namely, Tiresias, Cephisus, Narcissus, Echo, and Liriope, appear in the story of Narcissus as told by Ovid. Cephisus, son of Pontus and Thalassa, and divinity of the river whence he derives his name, is the father of the hero; the nymph Liriope is his mother. Tiresias, the blind prophet of Thebes, and Echo, the unhappy victim of the anger of Juno and the contempt of Narcissus, are well-known figures in classical mythology. Neither Dorastus and Clinias, who attend Narcissus as youthful friends, nor Florida and Clois, nymphs enamoured of his beauty, have any actual counterparts in the _Metamorphoses_.

Most curious and interesting is the inclusion of "The Well" in the list of characters. We have here no mere stage property, or piece of scenery, but an actual personification of an inanimate object, closely resembling that of Wall and Moonshine in Peter Quince's company. Just as Moonshine carries a lantern to represent more vividly the actual moon, so the personage called The Well aids the imagination of his audience by the visible sign of a water-bucket. The fact of his being enumerated amongst the _dramatis personæ_ shows that the part was played by a separate artist, and not doubled with that of any other character. Of the Porter, Francis, more will be said in Section II.

* * * * *

The play of _Narcissus_, though it can boast of no artificial divisions, falls naturally into twelve different portions, which for want of a better term I will call scenes. Whilst using this word it is necessary to bear in mind that no change of _scenery_ is implied, and probably none was intended.

_Scene I._ reveals Cephisus, Liriope, and Narcissus, awaiting the prophet Tiresias. It consists of 132 lines, amplified from _Met._ iii. 341, 346-348:

"Prima fide vocisque ratæ tentamina sumsit Cærula Liriope ... ... De quo consultus, an esset Tempora maturæ visurus longa senectæ Fatidicus vates--'Si se non viderit' inquit."

The introduction of Cephisus, the conversation between Narcissus and his parents, the telling of the youth's fate _by the aid of chiromancy_, and Liriope's scornful comment on the prophecy, are the materials used by the English writer to form an effective scene.

_Scene II._ is wholly an interpolation. Dorastus and Clinias also try their fate with Tiresias; he prophesies their early death, and they jest upon the subject.

_Scene III._, in which Dorastus and Clinias flatter Narcissus for his beauty, has no counterpart in Ovid. Probably, however, it was suggested by _Met._ iii. 353-355:

"Multi illum juvenes, multæ cupiere puellæ; Sed fuit in tenera tam dira superbia forma; Nulli illum juvenes, nullæ tetigere puellæ."

_Scene IV._ pursues a like theme; the nymphs Florida and Clois are in their turn repulsed by the scornful youth, and relate their woes to Dorastus and Clinias.

The hint for this is given in _Met._ iii. 402:

"Sic hanc, sic alias undis aut montibus ortas Luserat hic Nymphas."

And likewise the suggestion of Florida's revengeful wish:

"Inde manus aliquis despectus ad æthera tollens 'Sic amet ipse licet, sic non potiatur amato!' Dixerat."

_Scene V._ Echo enters, and gives an account of herself, amplified--with a very free use of the English vernacular--from _Met._ iii. 356-368.

_Scene VI._, which has no counterpart in Ovid, consists of a spirited hunting-song in five stanzas, sung (presumably) while Narcissus, Dorastus, and Clinias chase a supposed hare over the stage.

_Scene VII._ introduces the "one with a bucket," _i.e._, The Well. The first twelve lines of his speech are a literal and smoothly-versified translation of _Met._ iii. 407-412. In Ovid, however, this description of the well comes after the conversation between Echo and Narcissus, and the account proceeds at once (l. 413) with:

"Hic puer, et studio venandi lassus et æstu, Procubuit."

It is doubtful why the English writer should have preferred to introduce the Well thus early. With Ovid's lines may be compared those in the translation of the _Romaunt of the Rose_ attributed to Chaucer:

"----Springyng in a marble stone, Had nature set the sothe to tel Under that pyne tree a wel.

* * * * *

Aboute it is grasse springyng For moyste so thycke and wel lykyng, That it ne may in wynter dye No more than may the see be drye.

* * * * *

For of the welle this is the syne, In worlde is none so clere of hewe, The water is euer fresshe and newe That welmeth vp with wawes bright."

_Scene VIII._ consists of a dialogue between Dorastus and Echo.

_Scene IX._ continues the same theme, Clinias being substituted for Dorastus. Both these scenes are interpolations, introduced evidently for the amusement of the audience rather than for any bearing on the main plot.

_Scene X._ Here Narcissus delivers himself of a soliloquy, suggested by _Met._ iii. 479:

"Forte puer, comitum seductus et agmine fido, Dixerat"--

He is answered by Echo, who wishes to proffer him her affection. The conversation, gathered from Ovid, runs as follows:

"Ecquis adest? Adest. Veni! Veni! Quid me fugis? Quid me fugis? Huc Coëamus! Coeämus!"

This, with various amplifications, is followed in ll. 602-630 of the _Narcissus_.

Here, however, there is no reproduction of Ovid's account: