Part 19

Merygreeke has been characterized[320] as "the Artotrogos of Plautus, the standing figure of the parasite of the Greek new comedy and its Latin reproductions." But, though Merygreeke was doubtless originally planned as the parasite of the play, and though here and there to the very end of the play we find allusions which corroborate this, I note, first, that the classical parasite[321] lacks the element of modern humour, of witty but, after all, good-natured enjoyment of the mischief which he stirs up; secondly, that Merygreeke is free from endless and--to us--tedious allusions to the "stomach"; and, thirdly, from the vulgar, and almost uninteresting, selfishness, revealed in such words as these of Gnatho:

Principio ego vos credere ambos hoc mi vehementer volo _Me huius quicquid faciam id facere maxume causa mea_.

I may be mistaken, but I cannot find that the classical parasite has any _fine_ touch of the humour that is inseparable from "humanity," from good nature. The classical parasite is, on account of this deficiency, distinctly inferior to this modern creation.

As completely as in Merygreeke's case, Udall disarms the moralist in the case of Roister himself, whose lying[322] and bragging, whose cowardice, matched only by his vanity, cannot possibly be regarded as setting a bad example, because they have reached dimensions which are grotesque and plainly ridiculous. They result only in the propagation of his folly, and that is allowed to reap its--poor--external fruit: Roister is "invited" to the banquet (and Roister has constitutionally a good "stomach"), and he is made to believe that he is a much "dreaded lion." Fate has fortunately not pressed the mirror into his hands. He is saved the sight of the ass's ears visible to every one else.[323] And as kind as Fate is his "friend" Merygreeke, who never reveals to him his absolute wretchedness, and who has to the last the satisfaction of knowing Roister a "glad man." Here was a great danger for a less skilful writer than Udall--a danger of marring our enjoyment of Merygreeke's part by inserting traits of a finer or grosser brutality, a danger of spoiling the whole feast by some drop of malice. The element of conscious humiliation is absent; the pathetic is consequently avoided.

The other figures of the play are kept in the background; even Custance, and Gawin Goodluck, who comes in at the end of the play to give the _coup de grace_ to Roister's foolish hopes. As a lover Goodluck is hardly a success. He is so fish-blooded that, in a scene which savours of a judicial procedure, the evidence of Trusty becomes necessary before he can be satisfied of the fidelity of his betrothed. Goodluck is obviously no Romeo. In the widow ready to marry again Udall presents a good study of character. Custance is a well-to-do London city-wife of the days of Henry VIII. and Edward VI., ruling like a queen over servants who themselves are happily introduced and capitally delineated. We imagine her neither lean, nor pale, but rather like the wife of Bath--like her, resolute and substantial, but more faithful. She is, to a certain extent, even shrewd; she enjoys fun,--after she has been made to see it,--and she is not without a touch of sentimentality.

Indeed, to Custance Udall has assigned the only serious scene in the play, Act V., Scene iii. This monologue appears pathetic, and sounds like a prayer of innocence, extremely well justified in a woman who finds herself surrounded by difficulties and involved in a complication which seems to question her honour. The last words of the complaint indicate, however, that Goodluck would better not doubt _too_ much, because Custance's patience might reach a limit, and her natural independence might sharply bring him to his senses.[324] She appears in that very scene as the match of Goodluck, who will be very happy with her if he gets her.

Udall shows his complete superiority over his predecessors in these delineations of character even more than in the creation of the plot. Though in the development of the latter everything fits together and is arranged in good order and proportion, it is, after all, the _dramatis personæ_ that interest us most. Udall's persons are men and women of flesh and blood, interesting and amusing living beings, not the wax figures of "Sapience" or "Folly," "Virtuous Living" or "Counterfet Countenance." Udall's persons are vastly superior to these wooden "dialoguers," whom one feels to be acting merely for a school-bred morality, and they leave the coarse-grained but witty figures even of Heywood's farces far behind.

If anything, his _persons_ show that Udall had studied his Plautus and Terence as a clear and sharp observer,[325] and that he had learned from them where the originals for a comedy were to be found--in life, in the actual world surrounding the poet.

=The Present Text= is based upon Arber's reprint of July 1, 1869, which has been carefully collated by Professor Gayley with the unique copy in the library of Eton College. The courtesy of the librarian, F. Warre Cornish, M.A., and the other authorities of Eton College, is hereby heartily acknowledged. In the present text all variations from the original are inclosed in brackets. But, in uniformity with the regulation adopted for this series, _j_ and _v_ have been substituted for _i_ and _u_ when used as consonants, and _u_ has been printed for _v_ when used as a vowel. References in the footnotes to previous editions are thus indicated: A., Arber's reprint; C., W. D. Cooper's edition for the Shakespeare Society, 1847; H., Hazlitt's Dodsley (edition in Vol. III.), Lond. 1874; M., Professor J. M. Manly's edition in "Specimens of the Pre-Shaksperean Drama," Vol. II., Boston, 1897. References to the Eton copy are indicated by E.

EWALD FLÜGEL.

FOOTNOTES:

[285] Wood's _Fasti_, quoted by Arber. Arber assigns 1504 as the year of Udall's birth, but makes him "æt. 18" in 1524. Cf. Cooper's Extracts from C. C. C. Register.

[286] Cf. Bale, _Catal._ ed. 1557, Cent. 9, 45 (fol. 717; general statement concerning Udall's Protestantism). _Lutheranis disciplinis dum in academia studuit addictus fuit_, Tanner after Wood, cf. Cooper, XII. It is remarkable, however, that we do not find Udall in correspondence with the reformers "in exile."

[287] In March, 1521, cf. Ellis, _Original Letters_, I. i, 239 _sqq._

[288] Reprinted from Leland's _Collectanea_, V. by Cooper, XII. XIV. XXVI.

[289] Cf. the epigram "_de liberalitate Nic. Odoualli_," quoted by Cooper, XII.

[290] Original among the _Royal Mss._, 18 A. L. XIV. Cf. _Calendars_, etc., VI., No. 564; _Ib._ 565, referring to Latin verses on this coronation by Richard Coxe, Udall's predecessor at Eton (from _Harl. Ms._ 6148, f. 117). Udall's verses are reprinted by Arber, _English Garner_, 2, 52; parts of them published by Collier and Fairholt. Cf. Cooper (XIII.), who dates the pageant 1532 (as does Ward, _Hist. Dram. Poetry_, I. 141). This pageant shows Udall's earliest connection with the revels, and may have given him a name at the side of Heywood.

[291] U. speaks later of the Eton mastership as "that roume which I was neuer desirous to obtain."

[292] Cf. Arber, p. 3.

[293] Cf. Warton, _Hist. of English Poetry_, 3, 308; _Interdum etiam exbibet_ [sc. _ludi magister_] _Anglico sermone contextas fabulas, si quæ babeant acumen et leporem_. Eton was the only place where _we know_ of _English_ plays; but Radulphus Radclif at Hitchin _may_ have performed some of his school comedies in English, as the "plebs" mentioned by Bale would not much have appreciated Latin performances, _Catalogus_, 8, 98, fol. 700; Herford, _Literary Relations_, p. 110, citing the occasional admission of English school plays at Eton, says that to "this concession we owe the _Ralph Roister Doister_." More likely we owe the concession to _Roister Doister_. Cf. Herford on Udall's _De Papatu_.

[294] It seems improbable that the _R. D._ was ever performed at Court; Udall's "interludes and devices" were pageants, as the _Loseley Mss._ prove; see below.

[295] Tusser's _500 Pointes_, ed. Payne & Heritage, p. 205.

[296] Cooper attributes to Udall's severity the running away from school of "divers" Eton boys alluded to by Roger Ascham (_Schoolmaster_). But this passage refers to 10 Dec. 1563, twenty-two years after Udall had ceased to swing the rod over the Eton boys!

[297] Cf. quotation from Nicolas's _Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council_, 7, 152-53, in Cooper; the date is 14 March 32 Henry VIII. (1541-42) and _not_ 1543, as Arber gives it. Arber dates Udall's letter also wrongly 1543; it is referred to 1541-42 in Ellis's _Original Letters of Eminent Literary Men_, Camden Soc., 1843, P. 1.

[298] "Accepte this myn honest chaunge from vice to virtue, from prodigalitee to frugall livyng, from negligence of teachyng to assiduitee, from playe to studie, from lightness to gravitee." He speaks about his "offenses," does not wish to excuse himself, but says "humana quidem esse, et emendari posse." He begs for a chance to show his "emendyng and reformac̄on," and quotes instances from ancient history of great men who had indulged in a "veray riottous and dissolute sorte of livyng" in their youth, had been "drowned in voluptuousness" and had lived in "slaundre and infamie," but had reformed. Not a word is said about thefts, "robberies," and such "felonious trespasses." Cf. the whole letter from a new collation in Flügel's _Lesebuch_, I, 351.

[299] U. does not beg in this letter for his "restitution," as Arber seems to accept.

[300] Cf. Cooper, XXIII.

[301] Mars had "the rule" there October, 1542-July, 1543 (Froude, 3, 525-570), then again August, 1547 (Somerset in Berwick, Froude, 4, 288); the naval expedition of Hertford in May, 1544, being here out of the question (_Ib._ 4, 32).

[302] This translation (published in September) might also indicate some connection between Udall and Aldrich during the summer of 1542. Aldrich was a great "Erasmian"; he had been the _juvenis blandæ eloquentiæ_ whom Erasmus used as interpreter on that immortal pilgrimage to Walsingham, and he kept up a correspondence with Erasmus.

[303] Udall took as his share _St. Luk_ and the "disposition" of the rest with exception of _St. John_ and _St. Mark_; perhaps he assisted also in the translation of _Matthew_ and _Acts_. The Prefaces are dated 1545, 1548. The whole must have been quite a lucrative business-undertaking, because every parish in England had, by law, to buy a copy of this work and "every parson had to have and diligently study the same conferring the one [_the New Testament both in Latin and English_] with the other [_the paraphrase_]." Cf. Cranmer's _Remains_, 155, 156 (1548); the Injunctions of Edward, 1547 (_Ib._ 499, 501), etc.; cf. also Grindal's _Works_, 134, 157; Hooper's _Works_, 2, 139, 143 (_Parker Soc._).

[304] Cranmer too wrote "_Answers to the Fifteen Articles of the Rebels_, Devon, Anno 1549," reprinted in his _Remains_, 163; and a number of references to the Rebellion may be found in the writings of the Reformers, f. i. _Letter of Hooper to Bullinger_, 25 June, 1549, _of John ab Ulmis to Bullinger_, May 28, 1550, of _Burcher to Bullinger_, 25 August, 1549. But none of these correspondents ever mention Udall.

[305] Cf. Cooper, XXX.

[306] An interesting letter of Udall's, dated August, 1552, referring to his place at Windsor, was printed in _Archæologia_, 1869, Vol. XLII. 91, but has not hitherto been utilized for Udall's Biography. The preface to a translation of T. Geminie's _Anatomy_ by Udall is dated 20 July, 1552; cf. Cooper, XXXI.; Udall's _Epistolæ et Carmina ad Gul. Hormannum et ad Jo. Lelandum_, are quoted by Bale, etc., and given under this year by Cooper (who reads: Hermannum). Hormann died 1535, as vice-provost of Eton.

[307] This warrant was communicated to the Archæological Society, December 9, 1824, by Mr. Bray (_Archæologia_, 21, 551), but not printed until 1836 in the _Loseley Mss._, now first edited by A. J. Kempe; No. 31, p. 63.

[308] See below, under Date of the Early Edition of _R. D._ Another early allusion to Udall as a playwright is that from Nichols's _Progresses of Queen Elizabeth_, 3, 177, according to which "an English play called _Ezekias_, made by Mr. Udall and handled by King's College men only," was performed before Elizabeth August 8, 1564, at Cambridge; see Cooper's Preface, xxxiii. Bale, who does not mention Udall as a playwright in the edition 1548 of his _Catalogus_ (he mentions only [Ochino's?] _Tragoedia de papatu_), says in the edition September, 1557, that Udall wrote "comœdias plures." There is nothing on Udall in his _Supplement_ of 1559.

[309] It is remarkable that these documents should never have been utilized for Udall's biography. Cf. the "Miscellaneous Extracts from Various Accounts relating to the Office of the Revels," printed among the _Loseley Mss._, p. 90. The Muniment Room of James More Molyneux at Loseley House, Surrey, would furnish these and perhaps other documents most valuable for Udall's History and that of the Early Drama.

The "scheme for an interlude, in which the persons of the drama were to be _a King_, _a Knight_, _a Judge_, _a Preacher_, _a Scholar_, _a Serving-man_," which Hazlitt (_Handbook_, 622) carelessly attributes to Udall, is not connected with his name; cf. _Loseley Mss._, p. 64.

[310] These _may_ refer to another pageant, _l.c._

[311] No exact date given by Cooper, XXXIV. Hales gives good reasons for the probability that Udall's mastership commenced in 1553; cf. _Englische Studien_, 18, 421; cf. _ib._, a very interesting note on the Terentian Plays, annually performed at the Westminster School. It seems almost as if here, as well as at Eton, Udall's headmastership had some significance for the history of the English school comedy.

[312] _Funerall Monuments_, ed. 1631, fol. 497.

[313] See above, p. 90, and notes.

[314] The Date of the First English Comedy, in _Englische Studien_, 18, 408-421.

[315] Professor Hales, in his essay on the date of _Roister_ (_Englische Studien_, 18, 419) quotes for these usury laws the incomplete account of them in Craik's _History of British Commerce_, 1, 22, 231.

The law of 1545 (_so_ dated by Ruffhead; and not 1546) is far more important on account of its clause about the "yearly interest" than of that about the ten per cent.

[316] To Collier has been given the credit of first ("soon after 1820") connecting Udall's name with _Roister Doister_, the unique copy of which had been published by the finder, the Revᵈ. Thoˢ. Briggs, in 1818. But, in the first place, Collier could not have identified the "ambiguous" letter in "Wilson's _Art of Logic_, printed by Richard Grafton, 1551," as he says he did, since "The rule of Reason, contei || nyng the Arte of || Logique, set forth || in Englishe, || by Thomas || Vuilson. || _An._ M. D. LI. _does not contain the quotation from Roister Doister_ (copy in the Bodleian kindly examined for me by Professor Gayley), _neither does the edition of 1552_ (cf. Arber). On folio 66 of the _third_ edition (1553) appears for the first time: "An example of soche doubtful writing whiche by reason of poincting maie haue double sense, and contrarie meaning, taken out of an entrelude made by Nicolas Vdal." And, in the second place, Collier had been anticipated, in part, for as early as 1748 reference had been made to the passage from Wilson by Tanner, who writes (_Bibliotheca_, 8. n.): In Thos. Wilson's _Logica_, p. 69 [it is _leaf_ 67 of edition 1567 in my possession] _sunt quidem versus ambigui sensus ex Comœdia quadam huius Nic. Udalli desumpti_.

[317] With this opinion, and that of p. 90, _n._ 4, contrast Fleay's argument, _Hist. Stage_, pp. 59, 60. _Gen. Ed._

[318] Ward in _Dict. Nat. Biog._ 26, 332. Ward says that in Heywood's Plays the "bridge had been built" to English Comedy. I think rather that this bridge was a temporary structure, waiting to be replaced by the more solidly planned work of a higher architect.

[319] These traits as well as the practical jokes would, of course, be especially enjoyed by the Eton players and their youthful audience.

[320] Ward, _Hist. Dram. Lit._, 1, 157 (Lond.: 1899).

[321] Cf. the splendid essay on the Roman _Colax_ and Parasite in O. Ribbeck's _Hist. of Roman Lit._ (_Stuttgart_, 1887), 1, 83 _sqq._

[322] "These lies are like their father--gross as a mountain, open, palpable."--Shak., _1 Hen. IV._ 2, 4.

[323] Ward, _l.c._, calls Roister "a vain-glorious, cowardly blockhead, of whom the Pyrgopolinices of Plautus is the precise prototype." That his character has some fine points, modelled after the Terentian Thraso, is shown in the notes (cf. especially the last scene). Roister's character, indeed, is the least original of the play, but he is not Udall's favourite figure. Udall did not spend as much labour on him as on Merygreeke.

[324] This possible complication, which would have yielded a fine scene, seems not to have occurred to Udall.

[325] In this respect even _Jack Juggler_ deserves credit. I find no trace of Plautus and Terence in Heywood's plays.

ROISTER DOISTER

BY

NICHOLAS UDALL

[The Persons of the Play

RALPH ROYSTER DOYSTER, "_Miles_."[326] MATHEWE MERYGREEKE, _his friend_. GAWIN GOODLUCKE, _London Merchant, affianced to Custance_. TRISTRAM TRUSTY, _his friend_. DOBINET DOUGHTIE, _servant to Royster_. TOM TRUPENIE, _servant to Custance_. SYM SURESBY, _servant to Goodluck_. HARPAX _and other Musicians in Royster's service_. SCRIVENER. DAME CHRISTIAN CUSTANCE, _a wealthy widow_. MAGE MUMBLE CRUST, _her old nurse_. TIBET TALK APACE } ANNOT ALYFACE } _maids of Custance_.

_THE SCENE_

LONDON[327]]

FOOTNOTES:

[326] Cf. stage-direction, III, iii, 83, and Appendix _B_.

[327] St. Paul's is mentioned, II, iv, 40; Sym Suresby seems to come directly from the landing place; the house of Custance might, therefore, safely be located in the _City_ proper.

Roister Doister

The Prologue.

What Creature is in health, eyther yong or olde, A ii But som mirth with modestie wil be glad to use As we in thys Enterlude shall now unfolde, Wherin all scurilitie we utterly refuse, Avoiding such mirth wherin is abuse: Knowing nothing more comendable for a mans recreation Than Mirth which is used in an honest fashion: 7

For Myrth prolongeth lyfe, and causeth health. Mirth recreates our spirites and voydeth pensivenesse, Mirth increaseth amitie, not hindring our wealth, Mirth is to be used both of more and lesse, Being mixed with vertue in decent comlynesse. As we trust no good nature can gainsay the same: Which mirth we intende to use, avoidyng all blame. 14

The wyse Poets long time heretofore, Under merrie Comedies secretes did declare, Wherein was contained very vertuous lore, With mysteries and forewarnings very rare. Suche to write neither _Plautus_[328] nor _Terence_ dyd spare, Whiche among the learned[329] at this day beares[330] the bell:[331] These with such other therein dyd excell. 21

Our Comedie or Enterlude which we intende to play. Is named Royster Doyster in deede. Which against the vayne glorious doth invey, Whose humour the roysting sort continually doth feede. Thus by your pacience we intende to proceede In this our Enterlude by Gods leave and grace, And here I take my leave for a certaine space. 28

FINIS.

Actus. i. Scæna. i.

MATHEWE MERYGREEKE. _He entreth singing._ A ii _b_

As long lyveth the mery man (they say)[332] As doth the sory man, and longer by a day. Yet the Grassehopper for all his Sommer pipyng, Sterveth in Winter wyth hungrie gripyng, Therefore an other sayd sawe doth men advise, 5 That they be together both mery and wise. Thys Lesson must I practise, or else ere long, Wyth mee Mathew Merygreeke[333] it will be wrong. In deede men so call me, for by him that us bought, What ever chaunce betide, I can take no thought, 10 Yet wisedome woulde that I did my selfe bethinke Where to be provided this day of meate and drinke: For knowe[334] ye that for all this merie note of mine, He might appose[335] me now that should aske where I dine. My lyving lieth heere and there, of Gods grace, 15 Sometime wyth this good man, sometyme in that place, Sometime Lewis Loytrer[336] biddeth me come neere, Somewhyles Watkin Waster maketh us good cheere, Sometime Davy Diceplayer[337] when he hath well cast Keepeth revell route as long as it will last. 20 Sometime Tom Titivile[338] maketh us a feast, Sometime with sir Hugh Pye I am a bidden gueast, Sometime at Nichol Neverthrives I get a soppe, Sometime I am feasted with Bryan Blinkinsoppe,[339] Sometime I hang on Hankyn[340] Hoddydodies sleeve, 25 But thys day on Ralph Royster Doysters by hys leeve. For truely of all men he is my chiefe banker Both for meate and money, and my chiefe shootanker.[341] For, sooth Roister Doister in that he doth say,[342] And require what ye will ye shall have no nay. 30 But now of Roister Doister somewhat to expresse, A iii That ye may esteeme him after hys worthinesse, In these twentie townes and seke them throughout, Is not the like stocke, whereon to graffe a loute. All the day long is he facing[343] and craking[344] 35 Of his great actes in fighting and fraymaking: But when Roister Doister is put to his proofe, To keepe the Queenes[345] peace is more for his behoofe. If any woman smyle or cast on hym an eye, Up is he to the harde eares in love by and by, 40 And in all the hotte haste must she be hys wife, Else farewell hys good days, and farewell his life, Maister Raufe Royster Doyster is but dead and gon Excepte she on hym take some compassion, Then chiefe of counsell, must be Mathew Merygreeke, 45 What if I for mariage to suche an one seeke? Then must I sooth it, what ever it is: For what he sayth or doth can not be amisse, Holde up his yea and nay, be his nowne[346] white[347] sonne, Prayse and rouse him well, and ye have his heart wonne, 50 For so well liketh he his owne fonde fashions That he taketh pride of false commendations. But such sporte have I with him as I would not leese, Though I should be bounde to lyve with bread and cheese. For exalt hym, and have hym as ye lust in deede: 55 Yea to hold his finger in a hole for a neede. I can with a worde make him fayne or loth, I can with as much make him pleased or wroth, I can when I will make him mery and glad, I can when me lust make him sory and sad, 60 I can set him in hope and eke in dispaire, I can make him speake rough, and make him speake faire. But I marvell I see hym not all thys same day, I wyll seeke him out: But loe he commeth thys way, I have yond espied hym sadly comming, A iii _b_ 65 And in love for twentie pounde, by hys glommyng.

Actus. i. Scæna. ii.

RAFE ROISTER DOISTER. MATHEW MERYGREEKE.

_R. Royster._ Come death when thou wilt, I am weary of my life.

_M. Mery._ I tolde you I, we should wowe another wife.

_R. Royster._ Why did God make me suche a goodly person?

_M. Mery._ He is in[348] by the weke, we shall have sport anon.

_R. Royster._ And where is my trustie friende Mathew Merygreeke? 5

_M. Mery._ I wyll make as I sawe him not, he doth me seeke.

_R. Roister._ I have hym espyed me thinketh, yond is hee, Hough Mathew Merygreeke my friend, a worde with thee.[349]