^{page 674 note 1} I find no record of any early chap-books on the Troy or Troilus stories (unless as noted on p. 676). For ballads“, cf. pp. 678–9.

^{page 674 note 2} M. W. W., i, iii, 83–4; my line-references are to the Tudor Shakespeare (Macmillan, 1911–13).

^{page 675 note 3} Some of these collections and remarks I owe to one of my students, Miss Marjorie L. Walker. Of course in other plays other references are made by characters of higher station. The popularity of the fighting in Elizabethan Trojan plays is shown by Davenant in 1643, who says of his auditors' ancestors at the theatre (prologue to The Unfortunate Lovers):

^{page 675 note 4} See pp. 676–8, below.

^{page 675 note 5} Henslowe's Diary, ii, p. 202.

^{page 676 note 6} Anyone solely interested in this may turn immediately to p. 726 ⁷ On all these plays cf. W. C. Hazlitt, Manual for Collectors of Old English Plays, Henslowe's Diary (ed. by W. W. Greg), Griggs and Stokes' reprint of the Troilus and Cressida Quarto, Ward's and Schelling's histories of the Elizabethan drama, W. W. Greg's English Plays Written before 1643 and Published before 1100 (Bibliogr. Soc. Publ., 1900), and his List of Masques, etc., 1902.

^{page 676 note 8} This may be what is referred to in the following entry in the Stationers' Register, 6 Apl. 1601: “The old destruction of Troye to print one Impression onely thereof for the Company.” Or this may be still another play.

^{page 676 note 8a} Perhaps the same as one of the others.

^{page 677 note 9} This play, together with Agamemnon (on which see below), of the same year and by the same authors, affords a perfect parallel to the two parts of Heywood's Iron Age. Perhaps it is the play referred to in 1600 (Halliwell-Phillipps, Outlines of the Life of Shakespeare, ii, p. 301). Halliwell-Phillipps and Small (Stage-Quarrel, p. 152) think Troilus and Agamemnon the same play, but this seems very unlikely; cf. pp. 703, 707 below.—One of the dumb-shows in Rare Triumphs of Love and Fortune (printed in 1589; Hazlitt-Dodsley, vi, p. 155) is on Troilus and Cressida; and so is one of the fragmentary plays acted in Histriomastix.

^{page 677 note 10} Cf. p. 703 below. The preceding play also may be identical with some other.

^{page 677 note 11} A still later work is John Banks's Destruction of Troy, 1678–9; in blank verse. It suggests Shakespeare's play, the scene being in the Greek camp and in Troy; Troilus is rather prominent, but Cressida does not appear. Dryden's Troilus and Cressida need hardly be mentioned.

^{page 677 note 12} This group is included because its subject is that of the fifth act of Heywood's Iron Age, pt. i; see pp. 707, 746 below.

^{page 677 note 13} Malone Soc., Collections, 1909, p. 249, and Hazlitt, p. 4; probably two plays.

^{page 677 note 14} Old Sh. Soc., vii, p. 13.

^{page 678 note 15} This group consists wholly or almost wholly of plays dealing, as II. Iron Age, IV and V do, with the later history of some of the Greek besiegers of Troy; sometimes with a view to showing how they came to grief. The popular sympathy for the Trojans is very apparent, the supposed ancestors of the western Europeans.—I should add that Seneca's Troades was translated by Jasper Heywood (1559, 1563, 1581); there was an Orestes, 1599 {Hens. Diary, II, p. 202).

^{page 678 note 16} Greg, List of English Plays, pp. 92–3; List of Masques, etc., p. xlvii; reprinted, Spenser Soc., 1887.

^{page 678 note 17} Greg, Henslowe's Diary, ii, p. 201; of. Orestes' Furies, 1599 (ib. p. 202).

^{page 678 note 18} I should further mention a ballad on Troilus and Cressida, coarse and not serious, based entirely on Chaucer; Old Shakespeare Soc., 1846, xxxi, pp. 101–5; Shakespeare's Works, Boston, 1857, v, p. 240; Halliwell's Folio Shakespeare, xii, p. 307. One or two other ballads are known of, one of them in dialogue form. Cf. the above references; Irving Shakespeare, viii, p. 194; Jusserand, Lit. Hist. of Engl. People, ii, p. 410; Griggs-Stokes' reprint of the T. and C. Quarto, p. ix. Dares Phrygius, tr. T. Paynell, was printed in 1533 (Esdaile, Engl. Tales and Prose Rom. Printed bef. 1740, Bibl. Soc., 1912). Among other indications of the popularity of the Troy story, cf. the following, from Tyndale's Obedience of a Christian Man (Works, London, 1831; i, p. 196; pointed out by one of the critics): “They [the Papists] permit and suffer you to read Robin Hood, Bevis of Hampton, Hercules, Hector, and Troilus, with a thousand histories and fables of love and wantonness, and of ribaldry, as filthy as heart can think,” etc. (first printed apparently in 1528, earlier than Thynne's Chaucer).

^{page 679 note 1} In Bullen's edition of Peele (1888), ii, pp. 241–265; Dyce's (Routledge), pp. 550–558.

^{page 679 note 2} Cf. Bullen's edition, i, p. xvii; Dyce's (1829), i, p. ii.

^{page 679 note 3} The hermaphrodite rhyme is common: thus—Patroclus (306–7), treason—son (318–9), this—Aulis (233–4). See also 9–10, 21–2, 39–40, 75–6, 103–4, 227–30, 282–3, 444–5. It occurs occasionally in contemporary writers, and is doubtless due to the supposed example of Chaucer,—to the natural 16th-century way of reading such Chaucerian rhymes as occasioun—soun; honour—flour. But it is curious that in Irish-Gaelic poetry the same sort of rhyme is regularly used in the so-called Deibhidh metre (Douglas Hyde, Lit. Hist. of Ireland, p. 483), and also in Welsh poetry. It is highly melodious when we feel it is not a mere license and when the rhythm is adapted to it.

^{page 680 note 4} The golden ball is said to have been brought from hell by Ate, not Eris; this seems to be unparalleled in ancient or modern literature, except in Peele's Arraignment of Paris (ii, i; printed in 1584). This is a further bit of evidence for Peele's authorship of that play, which otherwise rests on a statement in Nashe's preface to Greene's Menaphon.

^{page 680 note 6} Ll. 46, 61, 123, 143, 152, 175, 192; cf. Her. XVI, 43 ff., 53 ff., 89 ff., 127; v; xvii, 195 ff., 115; xvi, 298 ff.; xvii, 154; xvi, 183–4.

^{page 680 note 6} Ll. 346–75; cf. Met. xiii, 1 ff. To Met. xiii, 430 ff., 551, rather than Aen. iii, 22 ff., is due the account of Polydorus (392 ff.).

^{page 680 note 7} Ll. 213, 227; Fabulae, 95, 96; but cf. Met. xiii, 36 ff., 162 ff. and Cicero's De Officiis, iii, 26.

^{page 680 note 8} Ll. 376, 400, 430, 480; cf. Aen. ii, 13 ff. etc., 506 ff. etc.

^{page 680 note 9} Ll. 294 ff. remind one of the festive meeting in Greene's Euphues his Censure (see below), which however was not published till after Peele's poem was written. It is not impossible that both remembered some earlier play. Peele's Tale has almost exactly the compass of the two parts of Heywood's Iron Age. There is another hint that it may have been suggested by some play. Ll. 262–7 describe a council of Priam and his princes to deliberate on the war, at which Cassandra makes an outcry, and urges the restoration of Helen. This scene in Caxton, Lydgate and the Iron Age comes before Paris abducts Helen, but here, as in Shakespeare's Troilus, the Admiral fragment and the Welsh Troilus, comes after the war has begun (cf. pp. 698–9, 740–5, 744–5 below). This scene may be called traditional in the plays we have, and may possibly be inherited from an earlier play on the subject. The shift in time is natural in a drama, but not in a sketchy narrative like Peele's.

^{page 680 note 10} Ll. 192, 264, 265, 272, 297, 313, 325, 331, 344, 470; cf. Caxton, pp. 536, 515, 537, 644, 621, 637, 642, 670. Or the source may possibly be Lydgate's Troy-Book. At the death of Hector there is a combination of the accounts in the Iliad and Caxton, p. 613. A further sign of Homer's influence may be Hecuba's twenty children (1. 15; Il. xxiv, 496 says nineteen). Throughout, my references to Caxton are to H. Oskar Sommer's edition (London, 1894), and those to Lydgate's Troy-Book are to the E. E. T. S. edition. Caxton's and Lydgate's works' are generally identical in contents to the most minute points, so it is often impossible to tell which has been used; except for the fact that Caxton begins with the reign of Saturn, Lydgate only with the Argonauts. The popularity of both, especially of Caxton, was due not only to their historical and modern air, minimizing the pagan supernatural, and the like, but also to the fact that they gave the whole story of Troy in order, while Homer, Virgil and Ovid gave only parts. Yet, so mediaeval in their ways were some writers even as late as the 17th century, that in the dedication of Heywood's Troia Britanica, mainly founded on Caxton, the only authorities mentioned are Homer and Virgil, who were used comparatively little.—Caxton was much oftener reprinted than Lydgate, was more easily read, and is known to have been oftener used; the presumption in doubtful cases is that he was used rather than the other. Caxton's book was printed in 1475(?), 1502, 1553, 1596, 1607, 1617 (Esdaile, op. cit.); Lydgate's in 1513 and 1555, apparently as a rival to Caxton. The continued popularity of Caxton is almost incredible; there were some fourteen other editions to 1738.

^{page 682 note 11} The same explanation of its presence seems to have occurred to a less kindly critic. In all probability Thomas Nashe is alluding to the Tale of Troy when he says, in his preface to Sidney's Astrophel and Stella (published two years later, in 1591; Nashe's Works, ed. McKerrow, iii, p. 332): “Others are so hardly bested for loading that they are faine to retaile the cinders of Troy, and the shiuers of broken trunchions, to fill vp their boate that else should goe empty,” etc.

^{page 682 note 12} See Greene's works in the Huth Library (vi, pp. 147–284).

^{page 682 note 13} Cf. the prominence of Cressida (164, 166, 233). There are verbal reminiscences on pp. 162 (cf. T. and C. v, 485) and 163 (iv, 1457–8). Cf. also the Canon's Yeoman's Tale, 1413–4 (also Gower's Confessio Amantis, vi, 1280) with p. 164; Reeve's T., 4054 and Mill. T., 3457–60 with p. 250.

^{page 683 note 14} Of. pp. 156, 159, 160, 284, 167–8 with Cx. pp. 621 and later, and 509, etc. Or the source may be Lydgate's Troy-Book, iv, 596 ff., n, 2106 ff.

^{page 683 note 15} Troia Britanica: or Great Britaines Troy; the dedication is to Edward, Earl of Worcester, and next comes an address “To the two-fold Readers: the Courteous, and the Criticke,” which suggests Ben Jonson's addresses “To the Header in Ordinary” and “To the Reader Extraordinary,” preceding Catiline. Chapman's Homer has prefactory addresses “To the Reader” and “To the Understander.” This cavalier manner affected toward the public contrasts oddly with the same men's servility to patrons, and is suggestive of literary conditions at the time. Troia Britanica was printed by W. Jaggard, in quarto. The only copy I know of came from George III's library to the British Museum. The work is briefly described by Eranz Albert, Münchener Beiträge, xlii, 150–1.

^{page 683 note 16} Similarly Jasper Fisher entitled his play on the valiant defence of the Britons against the first Roman invasion Fuimus Troes (printed in 1633; see W. W. Greg's List of English Plays, Bibliogr. Soc., 1900). As to the prevalence of this belief at an even later date, cf. the introduction to my edition of Troilus and Cressida in the Tudor Shakespeare, p. xvii.

^{page 683 note 17} The former was reprinted in 1607 and 1634; the Gerusalemme had been partially translated also in 1594 by Richard Carew, and Boiardo's Orlando Innamorato by Robert Tofte in 1598. The verse and other points assimilate the Troia to such works rather than to Spenser's Fairy Queen (1590–6); though the general influence of that is also visible.

^{page 684 note 18} There are details not found elsewhere and common to both. One episode in both, unknown in other accounts of the Trojan War (but cf. Peele's Tale, p. 680 above), is the feast given in Troy to the Greeks (T. B. xiii; I. A. 301–9); much of the detail is closely parallel. That it is a reminiscence from Greene's Euphues his Censure is shown by the fact that it is here, and not in a Trojan temple at Hector's anniversary service, as in Caxton, p. 621, that Achilles falls in love with Polyxena (T. B., pp. 335–6, xiii, 17 ff.; I. A., pp. 303, 306; cf. p. 725 below).

^{page 688 note 20} E. g., Apollo and Admetus (canto iv; Caxton, p. 84); Troilus' taunt to Helenus (T. B., p. 188; Cx. p. 524; also in Shakespeare's Troilus and in the Welsh play). That Heywood used Caxton directly, and not merely the Ages, is proved by such passages as pp. 186–7 (nearer Cx. 518–9 than I. A. 266–7), and pp. 184–5 (cf. Cx. 511–5 and I. A. 268).

^{page 688 note 21} Certainly not Lydgate's Troy-Booh, which begins only with the story of Jason. Such a form as Ioppen (c. vi) proves the use of Cx. (214–21). Likewise the word ortiges is interpreted as quails in the Troia and Caxton (p. 549); as curlews in Lydgate (ii, 5445). The names of the six gates of Troy (T. B., p. 180) are nearer to the forms in Caxton than to those in Lydgate. The form Tytanoyes (p. 409) is from Caxton (cf. p. 719 below). That Caxton is the main source is the conclusion of Hofberger in an apparently unpublished Staatsexamenarbeit (1907), referred to by Franz Albert (Münch. Beitr., xlii, p. 151).

^{page 688 note 22} On these two pieces see pp. 715–8 below. They had a curious fortune. The thoroughly unprincipled printer of the Troia, William Jaggard, had published The Passionate Pilgrim in 1599, and attributed it to Shakespeare (he also printed the 1623 folio). In its third edition, 1612, he included these two translations as by Shakespeare, and though Heywood at the end of his Apologie for Actors, 1612, immediately protested with tact and firmness, and declared that Shakespeare was equally displeased, they remained in the 1640 edition of Shakespeare's poems, and in such later ones as those of 1710 (Gildon's), 1725 (Sewell's) 1775 (?) and 1804. Of. Farmer's Essay on the Learning of Shakespeare (in Reed's Shakespeare, 1822; i, p. 137); Furnivall in the Leopold Shakespeare, p. xxxv; Collier's edition, viii, p. 227; Halliwell's Folio Shakespeare, xvi, p. 467; Halliwell-Phillips' Outlines of the Life of Shakespeare, i, pp. 236–7; Heywood's Apologie for Actors (Sh. Soc., p. 62; he complains bitterly also of the inaccurate printing of the Troia). Heywood was unlucky as to his translations from Ovid; in the preface to the Brazen Age he taxes one Austin, a schoolmaster at Ham, with claiming as his own Heywood's youthful versions of three books of the Ars Amatoria and two of the Remedium Amoris. In The Nation, N. Y., 9 Apr., 1914, (vol. 98, p. 390) I pointed out that in these versions from the Heroides Heywood seems to have been the pioneer in the English closed couplet, the traits of which are not regularly but frequently found in them, and which therefore is directly traceable to the Latin elegiac distich, the verse of the Heroides.

^{page 689 note 23} E. g., for the death of Patroclus, and Thetis' seeking new arms for Achilles (c. xiii; Il. xvii, xviii); for some parts at least of the single-combat scene between Hector and Ajax (c. xii; Il. vii); and probably for the figure of Thersites (p. 171; who curiously is said to have been “ well featur'd” but made “ Stigmaticke and lame” by the angry Muses).

^{page 689 note 24} The debate of Ajax and Ulysses for Achilles' arms, and Ajax's madness and death (p. 407; Met. xiii); a printed marginal gloss says “Ouid metamor” In the pre-Trojan part of the work I have no doubt he used the Metamorphoses now and then (though his main source was Caxton); e.g., for the story of Orpheus and “Euridia” (c. vii; Met. x, 1 f.).

^{page 689 note 25} T. B., p. 333. The presents are exchanged in Il. vii, 299, but nothing is said of their later use. Chapman in his commentary merely says they were later the cause of the heroes' deaths.

^{page 690 note 26} It was entered S. R. 5 Dec, 1608, for W. Jaggard.

^{page 690 note 27} S. E. Gardiner, Hist. of Engl. (London, 1883), i, p. 300. The general drunkenness among the Danes gave great scandal; the author of Hamlet might have said “I told you so.” An account of The King of Denmarlces welcome, July, 1606, is attributed to Lyly (ed. Bond, i, pp. 505–7). The other rather vaguely-mentioned festivities may have been connected with the treaty between England and Spain in 1604, in which the Archduke of Austria, the Duke of Brunswick, and the Landgrave of Hesse were involved (Gardiner, I, pp. 208–14; Rymer's Foedera, London, 1715, xvi, pp. 581, 591, 617, 624). In his Apologie for Actors, p. 40, Heywood says English actors had been especially patronized by the late King of Denmark, the Duke of Brunswick, the Landgrave of Hesse, and others.

^{page 690 note 28} Fleay, Chron. of the Engl. Drama, i, p. 281; Greg, Henslowe's Diary, ii, pp. 106–8, 284–5; J. T. Murray, Engl. Dram. Companies (Boston, 1910), i, pp. 52–3, ii, pp. 141–3. Late In 1603 Worcester's players became the Queen's, till whose death in 1619 Heywood was one of her servants (Murray, i, pp. 185–96; Malone Soc. Collections, p. 266).

^{page 691 note 29} The only copy known to me is in the British Museum, inscribed “Bequeathed by Th. Tyrwhitt Esqr 1786.” Notes on a back flyleaf, in Tyrwhitt's handwriting apparently, show that he was thinking of the poem or its source as a parallel or source for Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida. The work was entered S. R., 3 Jan. 1614.

^{page 692 note 30} Albert, pp. 125–142.

^{page 692 note 31} Albert, pp. 2–5.

^{page 692 note 32} There is absolutely no ground for the implication there that the book attributes itself to “T. H.”

^{page 692 note 33} See G. C. Moore-Smith in Mod. Lang. Rev., v, pp. 222–3; Ackermann in Angl. Beibl. xxii, pp. 173–4; Glöde in Literaturblatt, xxxii, pp. 95–6.

^{page 693 note 34} Albert, pp. 152–165 (especially 154 and 159).

^{page 693 note 35} E. g., Crete and Iberia modernized as Candia and Spain. It is true that Crete is not mentioned here by Ovid, but the sire of the Minotaur was certainly well-known, and his connection with Crete is clear in the early part of Met. viii.

^{page 693 note 36} If it seems unlikely that Hector was entirely written within the year, he might have read and made insertions borrowed from a play published by the author of Troia, which he was more or less imitating. Such verbal agreements as exist, together with the author's general ignorance, of which Dr. Albert gives cases, favor the idea that resemblance to Heywood's undoubted works are due to imitation. Dr. Albert hardly considers this possibility, and in the absence of the texts I cannot do so fully. It is striking that the resemblances are in the parts not due to Lydgate, as if the author were consciousl supplementing by consulting Heywood's works. The idea of imitation is confirmed by the striking fact that Albert shows no parallels of the slightest consequence between Hector and the two parts of Iron Age (of. Albert, pp. 158, 162), which (published 1632) he could not have read.

^{page 694 note 37} Sometimes he is mistaken as to fact. The name Margariton (Albert, pp. 92, 167) does not come from Caxton or Heywood, but is in Lydgate, iii, 5204, etc. (the 1555 edition is not accessible to me).

^{page 694 note 38} Albert, pp. 26–35, 149. Troia shows little of the laxity in rhyme and verse common in contemporary long narrative poems (including the Fairy Queen).

^{page 695 note 39} Golden Age, 1611, Silver and Brazen Ages, 1613. The Iron Age seems to have been too popular on the stage to print as yet. For much clearer evidence that he had these unprinted plays in mind when writing the Troia, see pp. 714–5 below.

^{page 696 note 40} It is true that the poem is not very accurately printed, but there are too many other things which cannot be unloaded on the printer to make it plausible to exonerate the author on all these points. Heywood himself complains bitterly of the careless printing of the Troia, but it contains nothing like this.

^{page 696 note 41} Edition of 1555 (sig. R. iivo), which was that used for Hector (Albert, p. 6 ff.). The poet is called “Franciscus Petrarcha” in Northbrooke's Treatise, about 1577 (O. Sh. Soc., xiv, p. 112).

^{page 697 note 1} Greg, Henslowe Papers (Bullen, London, 1907), pp. 129, 142. Mr. Greg was the first to publish this interesting outline, though other similar ones had been published earlier by Malone and others. For lack of another convenient name, I call the play after the company which performed it.

^{page 698 note 2} This is shown by the fact that the other similar documents have holes near the top to facilitate hanging on a peg in the play-house. This one happens to be badly mutilated near the top; the two bottom lines in each column are also injured, and there are holes elsewhere. My former colleague Dr. C. H. Van Tyne kindly examined the MS. for me.

^{page 698 note 3} The similar outline of The Battle of Alcazar (Greg, pp. 138 ff.) agrees very closely with Peele's extant play. Though there are some things in one which are not in the other, we could restore the play very satisfactorily from the outline, if we had as much knowledge of the material as we have in this case.

^{page 698 note 4} As in Shakespeare's Troilus (ii, ii), the Welsh play and Peele's poem. In Heywood's Iron Age (pp. 265–271), the Troia, Lydgate's Troy-Book and Caxton (515 ff.), the scene comes before Paris has eloped with Helen.

^{page 698 note 5} I.A., 292–3; Cx. 558 ff. Menelaus also seems to appear in person to demand his wife, as later in I. A. (p. 307).

^{page 699 note 6} As in Shakespeare, ii, ii, 97 ff.; I. A., 269–271; Cx. 526–7.

^{page 699 note 7} “Antenor ” had been erroneously written, like “Priam” in sc. 9 (Greg, p. 150).

^{page 699 note 8} As in Chaucer's T. C., iv; Shakespeare's T. C., iii, iii.

^{page 700 note 9} “Antenor” of sc. 8 belongs in se. 9; “Priam” is a mistake in sc. 9 (Greg, p. 150).

^{page 701 note 10} Printed in 16th century editions of Chaucer. This scene is unparalleled in Shakespeare, Heywood, and Caxton, but is in the Welsh Troilus.

^{page 702 note 11} In I. A. I it is followed by those of Troilus and Achillea (act v contains the contest for the latter's armor).

^{page 702 note 12} Other striking features are the prominence of Deiphobus, Antenor, and Polyxena.

^{page 702 note 13} Polyxena never appears in the Iliad, Cassandra but twice (insignificantly, with nothing on her prophecies), and Antenor is an aged sage (iii, 148; similarly in Ovid, Her., v, 95). The form “menalay” appears three times, and “Menelaus” but once; the latter is Caxton's and the usual form, “Menelay” generally Lydgate's. This looks as if Lydgate were the chief source.

^{page 703 note 14} Senslowe's Diary, ed. Greg, ii, pp. 99, 288; Greg, Henslowe Papers, pp. 136, 140. Richard Jones trained the children of the queen's revels in 1610 (Malone Soc. Collections, 272). See also Fleay's list of actors in Hist. of the Stage, pp. 370 ff., and J. T. Murray, Engl. Dram. Companies, i, pp. 120, 124, 131.

^{page 703 note 15} Diary, i, p. 45; ii, p. 285; Hensl. Papers, pp. 136, 138, and cf. pp. 18, 111; also Murray, l.c. He is mentioned in various connections in 1611 and 1621 (G. F. Warner, Catalogue of mss. at Dulwich, 1881, pp. 188, 240, 340).

^{page 703 note 16} Hensl. Papers, pp. 115, 136; cf. Diary, i, p. 106; ii, 303; Murray, l. c.

^{page 703 note 17} Diary, i, p. 31, 44–5.

^{page 703 note 18} Diary, i, pp. 26, 106; ii, pp. 286, 288.

^{page 703 note 19} Diary, ii, p. 202; cf. M. L. Hunt, Thomas Dekker (N. Y., 1911), p. 49. In the very next month, May, 1599, Dekker and Chettle were paid for Agamemnon (licensed in June); in this entry “troylles & creseda.” had first been written by mistake (Hensl. Diary, i, p. 109). This was probably a continuation of the other, relating the return and death of Agamemnon. So this pair of plays would parallel the two parts of the Iron Age (as noted earlier).

^{page 704 note 20} See Mod. Lang. Review, x, 265–282 (July, 1915), where also the more interesting scenes are fully printed in translation for the first time.

^{page 705 note 21} Parts of these two plays were made over into a play called Calisto, and probably played about 1624 (Bullen, Old Plays, ii, p. 419; iv, p. 99–101; Hazlitt, Manual of O. E. Plays, p. 33).

^{page 705 note 22} The five plays form the third volume of the 1874 edition of Heywood's dramatic works. The Golden and Silver Ages were also published by the Shakespeare Society in 1851 (vol. 46). The former was entered S. R. 14 Oct., 1611; there are no entries for the others. The Golden Age was acted by the Queen's company at the Bull, the title-page says: The former players of Lord Worcester were the Queen's from 1603 to 1619; the Red Bull theatre was used from 1609 to 1642 (Greg, Senslowe's Diary, ii, pp. 97, 107; Fleay, Hist. of the Stage, p. 368). The Queen's men were associated with it from 1609 to 1623 (Murray, Engl. Dr. Co's., i, p. 190). So Golden Age must have been acted between 1609 and 1611; how long before no one can say with certainty. Silver Age was performed at Court 12 Jan., 1612 (Murray, i, pp. 174, 201).

^{page 707 note 23} Speaking generally, of course conclusions as to plays published long after they were written are imperfectly reliable because this or that part cannot be proved not to be a later addition. But a high probability is attainable.

^{page 708 note 24} This was certainly true when the preface to The Silver Age was written (1613).

^{page 708 note 25} Later in I. A., pt. i (p. 335), Telamon is incorrectly said to have been at “Isliums second sacke”; this is not in Metam. xiii, whence the context is derived.

^{page 709 note 26} Caxton probably refers to the destruction by Hercules (296) and the inundation by Neptune (271); the latter is referred to in B. A. also (204), but had nothing to do with the Greeks. The passages in I. A. under discussion were an addition to the corresponding passages in Caxton, and were doubtless due to the rubric and a confused memory. In Troia Britanica, canti vi, vii, Troy is. twice destroyed by Hercules, but this was written later.

^{page 709 note 27} This is contrary to Collier's opinion (O. Sh. Soc., xlvi, p. v).

^{page 709 note 28} On performances of G. A., cf. p. 706 above. With the ambiguities of Elizabethan style, it is impossible to be sure whether this play had three younger brothers, or was the eldest of three brothers; that is, whether or not Iron Age had been already performed. Most cities understand the former, which fits my evidence as to the order of the plays and is certainly not ruled out by the language. Heywood may have been thinking of his own Ages when he wrote in his Trow, p. 105, “In Saturne ended the golden world, and in his sonne Iupiter began the Brazen age ”; this was probably written about 1607. But he might have been thinking of Ovid, Met. I, 89–124. A careful examination of the trilogy with the early part of the Troia, which is closely parallel, I suspect might show clear evidence that the former came first. There is a fairly clear reference to the Silver and Brazen Ages in Heywood's Apologie for Actors, 1612 (O. Sh. Soc., 1841, p. 21).

^{page 710 note 29} Fleay, Chron. Engl. Drama, i, pp. 283–5, but cf. Collier's edition of Henslowe's diary, pp. 51, 74; Schelling's Elizabethan Drama, ii, p: 20.

^{page 710 note 30} Hercules was bought by Henslowe in May, 1598 (Diary, i, p. 86).

^{page 711 note 31} Henslowe's Diary, i, pp. 22, 24, 28; 25, 27, 86, 90, 151; 42. Heywood was writing for Henslowe at least as early as October, 1596 (“hawodes bocke”; Diary, i, p. 45); and was writing for the Admiral's men in 1598–9 (ii, p. 284).

^{page 711 note 32} Senslowe Papers (ed. Greg), pp. 114–8. The suggestion is Fleay's.

^{page 711 note 33} Henslowe Papers, pp. 55, 118.

^{page 712 note 34} It is odd that these plays, written in series and doubtless originally named as now, should have these arbitrary designations from Henslowe, though he often does misname plays. Of Heywood's other plays, or properties for them, almost none are mentioned in the Diary.

^{page 712 note 35} Meres's Palladia Tamia (1598; see Gregory Smith, Eliz. Crit. Ess., ii, p. 320; Haslewood, ii, p. 154) mentions Heywood as among the best writers of comedy; this fits the Ages pretty well, and none of his other plays are known to be so early (but of course many of his plays are lost). I would suggest also that these mythological plays of Heywood are what is referred to in Kempe's well-known speech in The Return from Parnassus, pt. ii, iv, iii: “Few of the vniuersity pen plaies well, they smell too much of that writer Ouid, and that writer Metamorphosis and talke too much of Proserpina and Iuppiter. Why heres our fellow Shakespeare puts them all downe, I and Ben Ionson too.” This part was acted in 1602 and printed in 1606. The passage may even be meant to compare Shakespeare's Troilus with Iron Age.

^{page 713 note 36} This is curiously like the “Prologue spoken at Court” written by Heywood (1633) for Marlowe's Jew of Malta:

The Jew of Malta was written about 1589–90.

^{page 713 note 37} Also quoted in Shakespeare's Troilus (ii, ii, 81 ff.):

a passage which also alludes to St. Matthew's Gospel, xiii, 45–6. It was so natural to quote Marlowe that it may have been done independently. The passage was often quoted or parodied; e. g., All's Well, i, iii, the clown's song, “Was this fair face the cause, quoth she, Why the Grecians sacked Troy?” In Metam. xv, 231 the aging Helen weeps over her mirror, which may have suggested Prior's familiar epigram, “Venus, take my Votive Glass,” etc. Cf. Troia, Commentary, p. 384; Koeppel in Bang's Materialen, ix, p. 25, compares Rich. II., iv, i, 283–4 and Middleton's Fair Quarrel, iii, ii.

^{page 713 note 38} This was often quoted and parodied, from 1598 on; cf. Shakespeare's Centurie of Prayse (New Sh. Soc.), Allusion Books and Fresh Allusions, which do not give the Heywood passage. In the True Tragedy the words are merely, “A horse, a horse, a fresh horse.”—It is doubtful if there is any evidence in the following parallel, mentioned by one or two critics. In a tavern-scene in II. Henry IV., ii, iv (1597–8), one drawer sends another to “find out Sneak's noise.” In I. A. I. (p. 312), Thersites taunts Achilles with abandoning arms for a lute,—

It should be noted that there is the same allusion in Marston's Dutch Courtesan (printed 1605), ii, iii, 120; Mulligrub asks, “Is there any fiddlers in the house?”, and his wife answers, “Yes, Master Creak's noise.” It seems less likely that Heywood and Marston are alluding to so obscure a passage as that in Henry IV. than that the key to all three allusions is lost.

^{page 714 note 39} In A Funerall Elegie, upon … Prince, Henry (1613) Heywood Bays none ever acted better on the stage of the universe than the Prince,—

No extant play except Iron Age shows Achilles' fall, and probably the reference is to it, though it might be to Dekker and Chettle's play (if not identified with the Admiral fragment) or some other. He alludes transparently to his own plays in saying that to reproduce the prince “Ages must backward runne” (sig. B^ro).

^{page 714 note 40} Edward Somerset, fourth earl, 1553–1628; succeeded William, third earl, 1589; patron of a theatrical company, to which Heywood seemingly belonged for a year or so from 1602. See Dict. Nat. Biogr., Henslowe's Diary, passim, Fleay's History of the Stage, pp. 86–7, 113, 369, 372, Murray's Engl. Dram. Companies, and p. 690 above, note.

^{page 714 note 41} One or two of the Pleasant Dialogues and Dramas (not published till 1637) cover a very little of the same ground. There is a list of his works in Fleay, Chron. of the Engl. Drama, i, pp. 278–281, and cf. the Brit. Mus. catalogue.

^{page 715 note 42} “These two Epistles being so pertinent to our Historie, I thought necessarie to translate, as well for their elegancy as for their alliance, opening the whole project of the Love betwixt Paris and Hellen, the preparation to his journey, his entertainment in Sparta, as also Hecubaes dreame, Paris his casting out among Shepheards, his Vision, and the whole prosecution of his intended Rape” (p. 211).

^{page 715 note 43} Address to the Brazen Age.

^{page 716 note 44} I. A., 275–290. “How shall I doe” … (I. A., p. 275, T. B., p. 209); “But more then” … (278, 201); “Because once … ravish't twice?” (278, 216); “That Theseus stole … tane this head” (278–9, 202); “I am not”… (279, 217); “And heare … your face” (279, 226); “Say I … pleasure” (279, 224); “Your Husband. … properer man” (279, 204); “When my … proclaims” (279, 220); “Harke how … heate ” (290, 210); “Alone …” (290, 210); “And who would … contend” (290, 211); “My father”… (290, 210); “Be held … Troy” (290, 199). This does not exhaust the verbal borrowings. The passages borrowed from may easily be found in the reprints of the two epistles mentioned above (p. 688, note). I may add that Heywood seems to have made no use of Turberville's translation of the Heroides (1567).

^{page 716 note 45} I find only the following:—“She dipt him in the Sea, all save the heele; … But what her dainty hand (forbore to drowne) As loath to feele the coldnesse of the wave” (I. A., 331, Thetys making Achilles invulnerable); “Plung'd him into the Sea, all save the heele, … Had she but drown'd her hand, … her nicenesse would not feele The coldnesse of the waves” (T. B., 308). “… Will spume down these our wals” (I. A., 373, of the wooden or brazen horse);—“are made to spume your mure” (T. B., 389). “… Witnesse you gods, that Synon cannot lye” (375, cf. 374); “Witnesse you Gods, that Synon camnot lye” (T. B., canto xv, st. 31 and cf. 22). “… I lept downe from the Altar, and so fled” (375); “I leapt from of the Altar, thence I fly” (st. 27). “… Of this sacred place Durst sprinke the childs blood in the fathers face” (391); “… in the same place Sparkled the Sons blood in the Fathers face” (75). “… And hew her peece-meale on my fathers Tombe” (392); “He piece-meale hewes upon Achilles tombe” (92; Polyxena does not appear in Aeneid, ii, which is followed hereabout). “… Æneas, with twenty two ships well furnish't, (The selfe same ships in which young Paris sayl'd When hee from Sparta stole faire Helena),” (395); “Rigging to sea these two and twenty sayle … The selfe-same shippes in which the Troian stale The Spartan Queene …” (st. 105). Other trifling parallels are on p. 373 of I. A. (T. B., xv, 18, 19); 374 (29); 375 (31); 379 (45); 382 (51).

^{page 717 note 45a} The former passages, being accessible, were not given in full, in order to save space. There can be no question that they are much more significant.

^{page 718 note 46} With other evidence, there would be a suggestion of a date before 1603 in the following. There is a curious parallelism between the relations of Frankford, his wife, and Wendoll in A Woman Killed with Kindness, and those of Menelaus, Helen, and Paris in Iron Age I, though both cases might have been suggested by the Heroides. Frankford urges his wife to make much of their guest in his absence (ii, iii), as Menelaus does (p. 277); after her fall he asks her, “Or in thine eye seemed he a properer man?” (iv, vi), which recalls Paris' “You needes must say I am the properer man” (p. 279). Here the context is from Ovid's Eeroides, this line being from xvi, 203–4, “ Nee, puto, collatis forma Menelaus et annis, Iudice te, nobis anteferendus erit.” This point was noticed by one of my students, Miss Edith P. Rings. A Woman Killed with Kindness was printed in 1607, but acted in 1603 (Hensl. Diary, i, p. 188).

^{page 718 note 47} Sir A. W. Ward, writing on Heywood in the D. N. B., says The Four Prentices of London, written about 1599–1600, is called in its preface Heywood's first play. This is hardly correct. Heywood merely with mock modesty says it was an early play. But cf. J. T. Murray, Engl. Dram. Co's., ii, p. 141; he sees a fair probability that Iron Age I and. II were acted by the Admiral's men in 1597 (p. 142). One more point, on the date of Iron Age II. No one can read the story of Orestes and Clytemnestra in acts iv and v without being strongly reminded of Hamlet (probably 1600–2). One detail, especially, the appearance of the father's ghost while the son is reproaching the erring mother (p. 423), seems to be common only to these two plays. But it may have been in the proto-Hamlet. A. C. Bradley (Shakespearean Tragedy, p. 419) thinks many passages in I. A. indicate that Heywood knew Shakespeare's Hamlet; I must dissent, even from the author of the best book of Shakespeare-criticism ever written, as to the convincingness of his parallels. A lecture on Hamlet and Orestes by Sir Gilbert Murray, just published (Clarendon Press, 1914), considers the underlying resemblances of the two stories.

^{page 719 note 48} Yet almost everyone says Ovid's Metamorphoses (cf. Hazlitt's Manual of O. E. Plays, p. 30, Schelling's Eliz. Drama, i, p. 19), or else Lydgate's Troy-Booh (cf. Fleay, Chron. Engl. Drama, i, p. 285, Sommer's edition of Caxton, p. xlii ff.). In Bang's Materialen zur Kunde d. ält. engl. Dr. ix, pp. 14–20, Koeppel remarks that we lack a thorough study of sources for these plays, but points out Caxton as a main source, and also Plautus' Amphitruo (p. 19). Swinburne also (Nineteenth Century, xxxvii, 651–2) suggested Caxton as source. There is a University of Pennsylvania thesis on Classic Myth in the Poetic Drama of the Age of Elizabeth, by Miss H. M. Blake (1911?).

^{page 720 note 49} The following may be compared: the birth and hiding of Jupiter (G. A., 13–20, Cx. 18–33); Lycaon's cannibal banquet (20 ff., 38 ff.); Jupiter's seduction of Callisto (very close; 23–35, 48–57); Jupiter saves Saturn from Titan (36–52, 60–80), dethrones Saturn (53, 100–2); the story of Danae (57–71, 102–31); Ganymede is conquered and carried off (72–7, 131–64). This brings us to the end of Golden Age. Silver Age begins with the story of Bellerophon (86–96, Cx. 201 ff.); Jupiter and Alcmena (98 ff., 226 ff., but mainly from another source). All these matters are either not in Ovid, or are scattered here and there in a different and shorter form.

^{page 720 note 50} Heywood simplifies by identifying Iole with Omphale. For the account of Hercules and Ms labors in Silver and Brazen Ages, he seems to have drawn on no single account, but to have used Caxton chiefly, and Ovid. With p. 126, cf. Cx. 242 (also Heroides ix, 21–2); with 127–8, of. Cx. 261; 128 ff., 297 ff. (briefly in Met., ix, 197); 132, 315 ff. (briefly in Met., ix, 192, xii, 210 ff.; Heroides, ix, 87–8); 144–6 and 156 f., 328 ff. (briefly in Met., ix, 185); 159–60, 334 ff.; 183–4, 305–8; 239 f., 483. It is notable that Heywood follows almost exactly the order of Caxton.

^{page 721 note 51} The fact that Venus tells Adonis, in Metamorphoses x, 560 ff., the story of Atalanta's race, may be what suggested to Heywood uniquely to represent Adonis as killed by the Calydonian boar, the story of which is in Met., viii, 270 ff.

^{page 721 note 52} This I have said was noted by Koeppel; also by A. H. Gilbert in Journ. Engl. Germ. Philol., xii, pp. 593–6, 604–7. I find no evidence of a connection with The Birthe of Hercules, a five-act play in a British Museum ms. of about 1610–20. It is supposed to be a university play, written perhaps 1600–6, “ a loose adaptation” of Plautus. It was published and studied in a Chicago University dissertation (1903) by M. W. Wallace, whose work is ignored in the Malone Soc. reprint of the play (1911).

^{page 721 note 53} A Hellenistic addition to the original story. Heywood may have read Lucian in Greek; but a full translation of Lucian into Latin by Jacob Micyllus, of Heidelberg, was published in 1538, 1543, 1546, 1549, 1615 (see the dissertation by Hautz, Heidelberg, 1842, p. 63).

^{page 722 note 54} Lydgate is given as the source by Fleay and Sommer, because they think Heywood wrote Hector; also doubtfully by Koeppel (Studien über S's. Wirhung auf zeitgenössische Dramatiker, in Bang's Materialmen, ix, 22). Even if he had written Hector this would prove nothing about a play written years before.

^{page 722 note 55} v, 701, 921, 954, 987, etc. (E. E. T. S., no variant readings).

^{page 722 note 56} “To see Ida … For Paris” (271–2); cf. Her. v, 41–2. “‘Tis decreed … farewell (272); cf. 35–6, 52–4.’ What needst … stranger“ (272); cf. 89–92, 99–106, 125–129. ”Though now … thy state“ (272); cf. 79–82, 9–12. Probably Heywood had consulted and remembered, but not previously translated, the epistle of Oenone to Paris. (I find no traces of the answering epistle of Paris to Oenone, by Sabrinus.) An English version of Ovid's epistles was entered S. R. in March, 1600.

^{page 722 note 57} E. g., Paris feigns drunkenness (281–2), Menelaus leaves to become king of Crete (273, 282), Helen elopes willingly (286). A curious speech of Diomed's (p. 287), “Let some ride post [from Sparta] to Creete for Menelaus,” is probably due to certain lines in Heywood's versions of Ovid: Menelaus is said to have “rid unto the farthest West” to become king of Crete (P. to H., about 1. 525), is “mounted on his Steed, Ready on his long journey to proceede,” “Hee's on his journey to the Isle of Creete” (H. to P., about 1. 270), “about great affairs is posted.”

^{page 723 note 58} In Cx. 671–3 and Lydgate, bk. v, the dispute is as to whether Ajax or Ulysses shall have the Palladium as a keepsake! At the end of this act there is a probable reminiscence (direct or otherwise) of Sophocles' Ajax, in which the hero after his disappointment goes mad, slaughters cattle thinking them the enemies who have foiled him, and when he returns to his right mind kills himself by the seashore. In I. A. (341–2, 344) he seems mad, persists in taking Thersites for Ulysses, threatens to slaughter a school of porpoises, and kills himself by the shore. None of this, except his death, is in Ovid.

^{page 723 note 59} Wound but not wounder mentioned by Ovid, Fasti, iv, 119–20.

^{page 723 note 60} In fact, in Heywood he cuts the most respectable figure he does anywhere,—is witty, penetrating, and judicious (274, 280–2), though still cynical, scurrilous, and misanthropic (cf. p. 747–9 below).

^{page 724 note 61} In Caxton, 588–90, Hector and Ajax have two unpremeditated jousts together; later Hector challenges Achilles and takes his gage (603). In Caxton and Heywood (not in Homer) they talk of their cousinship. Il. iii, 85 ff., the single combat of Menelaus and Paris for Helen, may have suggested their contest of persuasion in Iron Age, pp. 306–9.

^{page 724 note 62} We have seen that I. A. dates from before, probably long before, 1607. In 1609 the first half of Chapman's Iliad appeared, the. completed Iliad appearing in 1611 or later. Only books 1, 2, 7–11, and “Achilles' Shield” appeared in 1598. On other translations cf. p. 742 below. The so-called Ilias Latino of the so-called “Italicus” or Pindarus Thebanus was well-known in the 16th century: it is an epitome of the Iliad in 1070 lines, supposed by Lachmann to have been written in the time of Tiberius. It was not, however, the source of Heywood's Homeric knowledge. All the above points (except Priam's fifty sons and Achilles' lyre) are there; but Hector's speech. of challenge, of which so many details agree in Heywood (p. 296) and Homer (vii, 67–91, is mentioned in only two lines (577–8).

^{page 724 note 63} The nearest parallel I find in the ancients is in Lucian's Dialogi Marini, v, ǹ καλǹ λαβέτω; Hyginus (Fab. 92) has “quæ esset for-mosissima attoleret.” Heywood's own Deorum Indicium (Dram. Wks. vi, p. 248) has “Give to the Fairest this as Beauties due.” On Ate cf. p. 680 above.

^{page 726 note 1} The Stage-Quarrel between Ben Jonson and the So-called Poetasters (Breslau, 1899), pp. 167–171. Mr. John Masefield is indignant at the idea of even so much as this; perhaps others will agree with him. Professor Penniman (War of the Theatres, 146) is doubtful if the play has any connection with the War, and thinks Ajax is not Jonson.

^{page 727 note 2} Ulrici in 1874 (Jahrbuch d. deutschen Shakespeare Gesellsch., ix, p. 29) thought Shakespeare made Ajax comic without any literary precedent, in order to heighten the comedy in the play. I wish to show that the comic Ajax was natural if not inevitable. But Sir Sidney Lee seems to exaggerate in saying that all the traits of Shakespeare's Ajax might have been suggested by Chapman's Homer (Life, p. 237 n.).

^{page 727 note 3} Palmer (Trans. Roy. Soc. of Lit., ii. Ser., xv, p. 66) errs in thinking this the main or sole origin of Shakespeare's comic Ajax.

^{page 727 note 4} Hence the play is sometimes called Aïas Mαστιγφρ or Ajax Flagellifer.

^{page 727 note 5} According to Lucian he is punished in hell and still resentful there (Vera Historia, ii, 17; Mort. Dial, xxix); in his De Saltatione, 83, Lucian describes a distressing and ludicrous overdoing of the madness of Ajax on the stage. Pindar (7th Nemean Ode, 24–30) champions Ajax as, next to Achilles, the most valiant of the Greeks at Troy, justly entitled to Achilles' arms.

^{page 728 note 8} On p. 677–8 above I gave a list of Elizabethan dramatic versions of the story of Ajax. In Spenser's Fairy Queen, iii, ii, 25, Achilles' arms are won by Arbhegall (!).

^{page 729 note 7} Nashe's Pierce Penilesse (O. Sh. Soc., xii, p. 79) speaks of spirits of earth which make men “run mad through excessiue melancholy, like Aiax Telamonious.”

^{page 729 note 8} It may be added that the account of Ajax Telamon in Caxton, Lydgate, Troia (p. 235) and Hector (p. 101) has little resemblance to any of the others, in fact contradicts them, mentioning his modesty. The account of Ajax Oileus is a little more like the usual account of the other.

^{page 730 note 9} All these works were reprinted by the Chiswick Press, 1814 (only 100 copies printed). Cf. Stat. Reg. iii, p. 15. Harington's skit seems to have been more or less imitated in the graceful and witty mock-Ovidian Metamorphosis of Tobacco, published in 1602, and in a contemporary hand on the title-page of the British Museum copy ascribed to John Beaumont.

^{page 730 note 10} See the definition of Retraict (mentioned in the Oxford Dictionary, s. v. Ajax).

^{page 730 note 11} This last point, Ulysses' urging of Ajax's burial, seems to be found only here and in Sophocles' Ajax (11. 1332 ff.). This may possibly be an argument against the Shakespearean origin of these lines. I am. glad to acknowledge on all this matter the assistance again of Miss Edith P. Rings. On Ajax in Shakespeare, cf. R. K. Root, Class. Myth. in S. (Yale Studies in English, xix), pp. 35–6.

^{page 731 note 12} Mentioned nowhere else outside Troilus.

^{page 731 note 13} See John Corbin, The Elizabethan Hamlet, pp. 55 ff. I do not mean that I accept all his deductions.

^{page 732 note 14} So Dr. Small, p. 169; cf. iii, iii, 244, ii, i, 70, 80, 120. It is possible, however, in the first passage, that Ajax is simply, like Malvolio, rehearsing imaginary conversations; cf. 11. 248–62.

^{page 732 note 15} But Thersites talks much the same of Achilles (iii, iii, 313–6).

^{page 732 note 16} A recognized trait of the mentally deficient. Of a half-witted country fellow, who would laugh when he was whipped, it is said, “it was his manner euer to weepe in kindnesse, and laugh in extreames.” This is in Shakespeare's colleague Armin's Nest of Ninnies (O. Sh. Soc., x, p. 38); he seems to apply to Ajax later an allusion to this very same fool (see note on iii, iii, 215 in the Tudor Shakespeare).

^{page 733 note 17} Small, pp. 29, 89, 99, 111 f., 122. So no wonder a man writing a monograph on the stage-quarrel should be inclined at first to recognize Jomson in Ajax.

^{page 733 note 18} This means that while his belly should be small and his head large, he has a pot-belly and a “pin-head.”

^{page 734 note 19} E. g., the anonymous play Mucedorus refers to Jonson as “a lean and hungry meagre cannibal”; this is in the editions of 1606 (cf. Small, p. 116), and 1610 (sig. F 3^ro).

^{page 734 note 20} It would be fully as defensible to see Jonson in Achilles, to whom Ajax is a comic counterpart. Achilles appears over and over again as proud, insolent, scurrilous, undignified (he encourages Thersites, just as Ajax scuffles with him). He is “lion-sick of a proud heart,” full of “humorous predominance” (ii, iii, 93, 138), and his insolence to Hector contrasts with the courtesy of the other Greeks (iv, v).

^{page 734 note 21} Thoroughly treated by Small, pp. 143–8, who gives other references; see also Fleay, Shakespearean Manual, p. 136, and bibliography in S. Lee's Shakespare, p. 49. For evidence from vocabulary looking in the same direction, cf. Sarrazin in the Jahrbuch of the German Shakespeare Society, xxxiv, pp. 148–9, 168.

^{page 735 note 22} It seems unlikely that the Chamberlain's company had two Troilus plays within a few years (though it is true that Heywood's, and Dekker and Chettle's, were both for the Admiral's men). Further, the licensee of this play in 1603 published in 1604 the second quarto of Hamlet, and also others of Shakespeare's plays (Lee, Life of S., 1904, p. 225–6). As early as 1790 Malone assigned the above date for the above reason; he thought the play “not one of our authour's happiest effusions.” I have pointed out that there is a little change in Shakespeare's way of speaking of Ajax in plays written after 1603 or so. Again, if he had already in 1599–1600 his later familiarity with the Troy-story, Rosalind would hardly have said, “Troilus had his brains dash'd out with a Grecian club; yet he did what he could to die before, and he is one of the patterns of love” (A. Y. L. I. iv, i, 96 ff.). The first clause contradicts Caxton, Lydgate, and others, according to whom Achilles cut off Troilus' head. Further, the Henrysonian and not the Shakespearean Cressida, “ the lazar kite,” the “ beggar,” appears in Henry V. and Twelfth Night (1599 and 1601).

^{page 626 note 23} Envy also appears in Histriomastix, iii, end, vi, end. In the epilogue of Mucedorus, 1610, Envy does say Amen (cf. T. C. ii, iii, 24, but also p. 748 below, note), and there is something similar in the prologue to the 1606 edition and at the end of the 1598 edition. But Shakespeare was hardly alluding to this. See the Tudor Facsimile edition of both plays (1912, 1910); Academy, ix, p. 402; H. P. Stokes, Chron. Order of S.'s Plays, p. 105. On the date see Boyle in Engl. Stud, xxx, p. 21, whose paper, of doubtful value, is reviewed in Jahrbuch, xxxviii, pp. 308–10.

^{page 735 note 24} Shakespeare's Money-Interest in the Globe Theatre, Century Magazine, lviii, pp. 506, 509. Wallace believes he finds many other allusions in T. C. to Kempe and the Globe-Rose rivalry.

^{page 735 note 25} Cf. Small, Stage-Quarrel, p. 147. There seem to be no certain contemporary allusions to the play. Saint Marie Magdalens Conversion (1603–4; see Centurie of Prayse, New Sh. Soc. 1879, p. 57) deems itself to be on a nobler subject than that “Of Helens rape and Troyes beseiged Town, Of Troylus faith, and Cressids falsitie, Of Rychards stratagems for the english crowne, Of Tarquins lust and lucreee chastitie.” This is regarded by Small (p. 142) and others as a reference to Shakespeare's Troilus, Richard III., and Lucrece. But it may as well refer to Iron Age, Rape of Lucrece (acted 1603), and II Edward IV. (printed 1600, and containing Richard's Ill's usurpation), all by Heywood; the Troilus does not tell of Helen's rape, Iron Age does. But it need not refer to dramas, to works all by the same man, or even to any works in particular. The supposed allusion to Shakespeare's play, and supposed pun on his name, in Histriomastix (1599 or earlier), are absolutely unreliable.

^{page 736 note 28} Pp. 154–167. He partially follows Hertzberg (Jahrbuch, vi, pp. 169–225), who in part follows Delius, Moland, and d'Hericault, etc. See also Eitner in Jahrbuch, iii, pp. 252–300; Koeppel in Bang's Materialien, ix, p. 14.

^{page 737 note 27} I ignore for the nonce the probability that the play is founded on an earlier one. On the relations of the two poets see also E. Stache, Verhältn. v. Sh. T. u. C. zu Ch.'s gleichnamigem Gedicht (Programm-Abhandlung, Nordhausem, 1893). It is hardly true, however, that he “adopts the character of Pandarus from it without change” (Small). Though with the degeneration of the character of Cressida from the earlier poem to the later, his guilt toward her would naturally seem to grow less, he is a far baser person in Shakespeare. His earlier humor and unmoral loyalty to Troilus have become ribaldry and second-hand voluptuousness. He gives the impression of being a much older man than in Chaucer (v, iii, 101 ff.). though it is his pose to seem in love. Of course he had long deteriorated in popular tradition; the proper noun Pandar had become the common noun pander early in the 16th century. The procuress in Gaseoigne's Glass of Government, 1575, is named Pandarina (cf. Wallace, Birth of Hercules, p. 58).

^{page 737 note 28} “The Sagittarye,” however, (pace Small) is mentioned by Lydgate (rubric before iii, 3484, E. E. T. S.). As early as 1733 Theobald said Caxton was used even more than Chaucer.

^{page 737 note 29} Cf. p. 681 above and pp. 755–6 below. Yet Mr. Saintsbury (Camb. Hist. Engl. Lit., v, 221) says merely that the play “may have been suggested by Chaucer,” and “owes much to other forms of the tale of Troy—perhaps most to Lydgate's.” Stevens and Deighton also err in attributing certain things necessarily to Lydgate. As early as the Merchant of Venice (iii, ii, 55 ff.; 1598 or so) Shakespeare knew the story of Hercules' rescue of Hesione; given at length in Caxton, 274–9 (not in Lydgate at all), and very briefly in Ovid (Met. xi, 211–4). On p. 681 I showed how much more popular Caxton was than Lydgate; the latter's work seems to have come out as a rival to the former's, just as Hector did to Troia.

^{page 738 note 30} Cf. Herford's article in Trans. New Sh. Soc., 1887–92, pp. 186 ff.; Mabie, Shakespeare, p. 255, etc. One little parallel is probably accidental; Greene, pp. 166–7; ii, ii, 175–6.

^{page 738 note 31} It is not surprising that there seems to be no important use of Virgil, since the play does not reach to the fall of the city; or of Ovid, whose influence in other works appears in parts of the story not found in this play. Cf. pp. 758, 760 below. Churton Collins (Studies in Sh., p. 64) and others compare i, iii, 85 ff. with Sophocles' Ajax, 669 ff., but no connection seems certian.

^{page 738 note 32} See his postscript to the play. H. R. D. Anders, Shakespeare's Books (Schriften d. deutschen Sh.-Ges. i; 1904), p. 42, is a little less sure than most. Even so thorough and informed a scholar as Dr. Small (Stage-Quarrel, 164–7) says, “The Iliad was accessible to Shakespeare only in Chapman's translation.” His opinion is accepted by Koeppel (Bang's Materialien, ix, 14). See also J. F. Palmer in N. &. Q. ix, vi, pp. 316–7, and in Trans. Roy. Soc. Lit., ii, xv, 63 ff. On debts to Homer cf. Small, 164 ff., W. W. Lloyd's Critical Essay on the play (e. g., in Singer's edition, London, 1856, vii, p. 325), etc.

^{page 739 note 33} Cf. Furnivall's introduction to the Leopold Shakespeare; Boas' Shakespere and his Predecessors, p. 378.

^{page 739 note 34} Ulrici (Jahrbuch, ix, p. 37) in his admirable article on Troilus as a comedy pointed out that the dragging of Hector by Achilles' horse could not be from Chapman, but might be from Salel and Jamyn (see below).

^{page 739 note 35} The assumption that Chapman is the source is explained by the fact that some of these editions were issued undated. Hudson, e. g., tlates two of them from two to eleven years too early. The date of the twelve books is established by a complimentary sonnet to Lord Salisbury, addressing him as Lord Treasurer, a title he received 4 May, 1609 (Bullen, in D. N, B.). Of course some use may have been made of Chapman's version so far as available; a slight verbal resemblance between Ulysses' reference to Nestor (i, iii, 172) and Chapman's bk. viii, is given by Palmer, Trans. Roy. Soc. of Lit., ii, xv, p. 67, but probably means nothing.

^{page 739 note 36} In order to collect all the possible indications of Homer's influence, I put in a note those that might have come through Chapman. The characterization, mostly original or due to Caxton or Chaucer, shows signs of Homer's influence occasionally, and strongly in case of Nestor and Thersites. Nestor in Caxton is little distinguished; a strong fighter (571, 579, 585), he is only once spoken of as old (545), and his wise eloquence is little dwelt on (542, 630–32). As the venerable and eloquent sage of Shakespeare he is probably due to the Iliad. (In like manner he appears in other plays and poems of Shakespeare, even earlier, but cf. also Metamorphoses, xii and xiii.).—Thersites, more important, and entirely absent from Cx., is developed but otherwise little changed from Il. ii, 212–277. His abjectness, cowardice, and scurrility in Homer are simply extended, regularized, and accounted for in Shakespeare by his position as the Fool of the play, much in demand among the less dignified Greeks as a purveyor of base amusement. (He appears in Met. xiii, 233, and is mentioned by Pindarus Thebanus, Juvenal, Seneca, etc.; Small, p. 165. Erasmus, Colloquies, Love and the Maiden, p. 115, speaks of him! as a type of the physically loathsome fellow.).—Small pointed out that Achilles' exaggerated pride (and insubordination) is from the Iliad rather than from Caxton (Stage-Quarrel, 165).—Achilles is twice referred to in an off-hand way as “Thetis' son” (i, iii, 212; iii, iii, 94). This is hardly a reminiscence from Cx., where she is barely mentioned, at the very end, long after the fall of Troy (692, 694); and hardly from Ovid or Virgil; but rather from the Iliad, where she frequently appears as Achilles' mother.—Most important of all, Hector's challenge to single combat, the choice of Ajax by lot, and the fight (i, iii, 260 ff.; iv, v) follow Iliad viii, though less closely than the corresponding scene in Iron Age does. (Cf. also i, iii, 75 ff. with Il. ii, 203–6, and i, iii, 171 with x, 131). The name of Cressida's servant Alexander is probably due to the name Alexandros used often in Paris. Many of the passages I mention are given by Small, 165–6, and Gervinus, Sh. Comm., pp. 687–8.

^{page 740 note 37} In four lines Caxton (p. 595) mentions Menelaus' wounding of Paris, among many other combats; possibly the source.

^{page 741 note 38} In the Iliad of course this comes later, after the death of Patroclus, before which Achilles does not fight at all. Ares is driven to faction also in Il. xv, 113 ff., in anger for the slaughter of his son, but by Deiphobus, not Achilles; in v, 461, he is driven by the exploits of Diomed to stir up the Trojans. Root (Class. Myth. in S., 83) refers to v, 864–98, where also Ares is driven to faction by Diomed. Of course the dramatist's memory may have slipped.

^{page 741 note 38a} But cf. Cx. 602.

^{page 741 note 39} In Cx. 639 it is Troilus' body that is fastened to the tail of Achilles' horse; the dramatist combines the two accounts. Very likely the dragging of Hector was well known.

^{page 741 note 40} Other parallels that have been or may be pointed out are i, ii, 2–4, 192–267, and Il. iii, 139–242 (but cf. Cx. 578); ii, iii, 272 and xx, 435; iv, i, 8–9, and v, 300–14, 430–45, xxiii, 290 ff.; iv, v, 119 ff., and vi, 119–236; v, x, 19, and xxiv, 602 ff.

^{page 741 note 41} Nor by the so-called Ilias Latina of Pindarus Thebanus, said to have been used in Shakespeare's day as a school-book, and suggested as a source by von Friesen (W. S. Dramen, pp. 362–3). This epitome, in 1070 Il., has little about Thersites, and lacks Mars driven to faction (see Baehrens, Poetae Latini Minores, vol. iii). It is quoted by Chapman in his commentary on bk. i.—If Shakespeare used an earlier play (pp. 755 ff. below), we cannot tell how much of the Homeric material came from it.

^{page 742 note 42} The late Churton Collins, who collected a remarkable number of striking parallels between Shakespeare and Greek poetry, admits, “Nothing warrants us in pronouncing with certainty that he read the Greek classics in the original, or even that he possessed enough Greek to follow the Latin version of those classics in the Greek text” (Shakespeare as a Classical Scholar, in Studies in Shakespeare, p. 15); “by 1570, Greek was commonly, though not universally, taught in the schools” (p. 13). As a counterblast to Collins, cf. Root, Class. Myth. in S., pp. 4 ff.

^{page 742 note 43} From the 1555 edition of Salel's French; the copy of it which Hall used, containing his autograph, is in the British Museum. Hall adds the “catalogue of the ships,” omitted by Salel, from the Latin. Thomas Drant's English translation of the Iliad (before 1580) is unpublished. My list of translations does not profess to be complete.

^{page 742 note 44} We should have some positive evidence as to the source of the dramatist's Homeric knowledge, if we could know that he had anything to do with the phrasing on the title-page of one of the 1609 quartos (the second, probably): “The Famous Historie of Troylus and Cresseid. Excellently expressing the beginning of their loues, with the conceited wooing of Pandarus Prince of Licia.” (One of the editors of the quarto-reprint, Mr. Stokes, thinks this description fits so ill that it must have been borrowed from some old and lost play. This idea is not only unlikely (especially on the second printing), but unnecessary; the first two scenes of the play are full of Pandarus' clever and witty wooing of each lover, and act iii, sc. ii, excellently expresses the beginning of their loves in one sense at least.) Passing over the humor in this Homeric air given to Chaucer's disillusioned worldling and Shakespeare's cynical reprobate, we must observe that the title hardly came from the Greek Homer. Pandarus appears about three times in the Iliad, as an expert bowman. In the list of the Trojan allies, he appears as son of Lycaon, leading the Troes of Zeleia (ii, 824–7), on the Sea of Marmora in the N. W. of Asia Minor; wounding Diomed, he exults that Apollo has “sped him on his way from Lycia” (v, 105), in the S. W. of Asia Minor; Æneas tells him that none of this land rivals him, “nor any in Lycia boasts to be his better” (v, 173; on Mm cf. also iv, 88; v, 246, 795). How the Zeleian can have come from Lycia still puzzles Homeric commentators, and the two vague and obscure references to Lycia hardly account for his title in the quarto; but when we look at the translations all is explained. In the first passage, the catalogue of the Trojan allies, Eobanus Hessus has “Qui vero Lyciam populi coluere Zeleam … Pandarus illustris duxit” (p. 67); and later “Pandarus … Lycio genitore Lycaone cretus” (p. 126). Spondanus, more than any other translator quoted and praised by Chapman (who mentions Salel, Valla and Hessus also), has “Pandarus, Lycaone genitus ex Lycia” (p. 46). Similarly the French: “Pandarus le Due des Liciens” (Salel-Jamyn, 1580, f. 66vo), “Pandarus de Licie” (ib. 68^ro) and Hall's English, “The bands of Zele in Lycie land” (p. 42), “Pandarus, the Lycian head” (p. 80), “the Lycian Pandarus” (82, 84 etc). These passages quoted are all cases where Lycia is not mentioned in the Greek; other translations show the same confusion, sometimes clearly caused by Pandarus' father's name. The title-page of the quarto pretty clearly reflects it, possibly derived from an original dramatis personae or something else in the MS., which might reflect Shakespeare's reading. We cannot be sure of this, but the point does show that the translations of Homer were well-known.—(There is nothing of all this in Pindarus Thebanus, nor in the early-published part of Chapman. There are articles on Chapman's Homer in Engl. Stud. v, pp. 1–55, etc., and on Shakespeare's possible use of French versions, cf. Jahrbuch, ix, p. 37).

^{page 744 note 45} Bang's Materialien, IX, pp. 20–3 (1905). In collecting the above parallels I am glad to acknowledge the efficient help of one of my students, Mr. Albert A. Bennett. Fleay oddly does not note the resemblances (Life and Work of S., pp. 222–4).

^{page 747 note 46} The unity of the play (comparatively speaking) is well exhibited in Moulton's Moral System of Shakespeare, p. 362. Except for the fizzling out at the end (cf. p. 756 below), the structure shows skillful manipulation of material which was even more fixed in common knowledge than that of the English historical plays, with which it really belongs in regard to the relation of play to source. All this is hardly recognized by Professor Brander Matthews (Shakespeare as a Playwright, pp. 230–3), and other critics who condemn it on structural grounds. In my introduction to the Tudor edition (p. x) I pointed out the subtle skill shown by the unifying balance of character and situation; I might add that I, iii, and ii, ii, balance each other. When Mr. Charles Fry put the play on in London, 1907, he cut and rearranged it very extensively; but modern theatrical demands are different from Elizabethan and far more stringent.

^{page 747 note 47} Of seventeen persons recognizable in the Fragment all but one are in Troilus, which has nine not in the Fragment.

^{page 747 note 48} Iliad, ii, 211–77; also Metam. xiii, 233. In the interlude Thersites (1537) he is quite different, an absurd miles glorious; it was made over from a Latin play by Textor (Engl. Stud. xxxi, pp. 77–90). Thersites is a more dignified figure in Iron Age than in Shakespeare or Homer. At the court of Menelaus (274) he is a privileged railing counsellor, with both sense and wit, and in the last act of pt. i is busy preparing the scene for the debate of Ajax and Ulysses (334). But at the beginning of pt. ii he embraces the vile Sinon as a kindred spirit (359), and throughout falls little short of his namesake in Shakespeare in the quality, though he does in the amount, of his ribaldry. The fact is that in Heywood his personality is not very firmly conceived. The main difference is that in Shakespeare he is plainly the Fool of the play, for which reason he should be taken the less seriously. On the whole, Thersites in the one play is hardly independent of Thersites in the other. On Shakespeare's Thersites see M. L. Arnold, Soliloquies of Shakespeare (Columbia dissertation, 1911, pp. 120–1).

^{page 748 note 49} Thersites answers, “Doe, doe, good Dog-killer,” on which Achilles beats him. Cf. T. C. ii, i, 45–7: “Do, do,” “Ay, do, do,” says Thersites to Ajax, who is beating him. Of course this is merely Elizabethan English for “Go ahead!”

^{page 748 note 50} P. 343; ii, iii, 46 ff. In I. A. Thersites goes on in a kind of imitation of the formula of excommunication; Ajax responds four times “Amen,” which reminds one of “and devil Envy say Amen” in the same scene in T. C. (1. 24), of Thersites' “Amen” when he has cursed Patroclus, and of Patroclus' “Amen” (36, 40). Again, “Both [Aj. and Th.J. Amen. Ajax … Our prayers now sayd, we must prepare to dye” (343). “I have said my prayers, and devil Envy say Amen” (T. C. ii, iii, 24).

^{page 749 note 51} Shakespeare assuredly did not write this helpless dialogue. Cf. also v, vii, where Thersites is challenged and spared by Margarelon.

^{page 750 note 52} Achilles' insolence here is not paralleled in Caxton and Homer; in Il. ix and Cx. 631 Achilles refuses Agamemnon's ambassadors, but courteously, as he does the king himself in Cx. 634.

^{page 750 note 53} Il. vii. In Il. vi, 212 ff. Diomed and Glaucus stop fighting when the former finds they are guest-friends through his father; they agree thereafter to avoid each other in battle, and exchange arms.

^{page 751 note 54} Nineteenth Century, xxxvii, p. 655; in one of his studies on Heywood. On the whole, Swinburne thought there was little to suggest the influence of Homer or Shakespeare on Heywood. He, like Koeppel, assumed that it was Heywood who would be influenced by Shakespeare, not vice versa. The above parallel is dwelt on by Koeppel (Bang, Materialien, l. c. pp. 21–2).

^{page 751 note 55} In Heywood's Golden Age, p. 17, Sibilla says Jupiter is her son as well as Saturn's, and she'll not kill her part. The conceit is not in Caxton or Homer. Heywood has it again in I. A. (p. 303), and also in Troia, p. 325.

^{page 752 note 56} The dragging of course is borrowed from Homer; in Cx. only Troilus is dragged. Troia, p. 353, is much the same as I. A. For other resemblances, both plays have the council-scene which was traditional in these Trojan plays, being also in the Fragment and the Welsh Troilus (cf. pp. 698, 704–5 above, and my article in Mod. Lang. Rev., x, 270–2, 278–80). The scene in I. A. follows Cx. 515 ff. more closely and comes earlier in the story than the corresponding scene, ii, ii, in T. C. While in Cx. the gist of Hector's speech is that it is imprudent to fight the Greeks, in both plays the gist is that it is unrighteous; a more or less natural change, without which Hector would have seemed cowardly. In both (269–71; ii, ii, 101 ff.), at the council Cassandra cries out against the war and Hector makes much of her prophecies, which are discounted by the fire-eaters on the ground that she is mad; this is not in Cx., who puts her outcry after the council has broken up; in Homer she is seldom mentioned, and never as a prophetess. The identical stage-direction in both plays, “Enter Cassandra with her haire about her eares” (I. A., 269; T. C., Folio, ii, ii, 100) probably is not significant, for the phrase is commonly used of her or other distraught persons. Cf. Ovid, Her. v, 114, xvi, 119; Heywood's Edw. iv, pt. ii, p. 165; Dicke of Devonshire, in Bullen's Old Plays, ii, 92. Both plays quote as to Helen Marlowe's line, “Was this the face that launched a thousand ships?” Both seem to represent Priam as having not fifty but fifty-one sons (I. A. 308, but cf. 266, 271; T. C. i, ii, 175–7). These last points are unimportant.

^{page 753 note 57} The philhellence A. C. Swinburne (Nineteenth Century, xxxvii, p. 655) felt “that the brutalization or degradation of the godlike figures of Ajax and Achilles is only less offensive in the lesser than in the greater poet's work.” Professor Herford would have found in Heywood far more likeness to the “manner” of Troilus than he sees in Greene's Euphues his Censure (Trans. New S. Soc., 1887–92, p. 187).

^{page 753 note 58} Shakespeare possibly, but not probably, Lydgate.

^{page 754 note 59} Very unluckily it is so far impossible to date I. A. exactly. But we have seen it cannot be much later than Troilus, and is probably earlier.

^{page 754 note 60} Of course the points could have been got by a spectator with a note-book, with or without shorthand. Such a proceeding would seem of doubtful honor.

^{page 754 note 61} His play being the less primitive, and probably the later. For another thing, the claim in the preface to the Quarto that the play was never acted publicly shows probably that at least it cannot have run long and successfully; while we know I. A. did. It would be superficial to exclaim against the idea of Shakespeare as the borrower. He had not been canonized in 1602, and one could show over and over again how the greatest poets ont pris leur bien oil ils l'ont trouvé.

^{page 755 note 62} Which can hardly have been the one that underlies the Admiral fragment; this seems to have lacked, e. g., Thersites and the duel. Nor Dekker and Chettle's Troilus and Gressida, if we accept its probable identification with the former.

^{page 755 note 63} Stage-Quarrel, pp. 147–9. It is often stated that the prologue is generally believed to be not by Shakespeare. Having made a pretty thorough examination of editions and criticisms of the play, I can say that by no means so many critics have taken this position, and that they seem to be guided chiefly by impression. After many readings of both prologue and play I can only state, for what it is worth, a contrary impression. There is evidence besides. The allusion to Jonson's Poetaster recognized in ll. 23–4 shows that it probably dates from the same time as the rest of the play, and its intimate acquaintance with the sources shows that it is probably by the author of most of the play or of the end; yet it is far superior to the wretched stuff written by the latter. The Greek princes come “ from isles of Greece ” (1. 1); this recalls “ the island kings ” (iii, i, 167), and “our island” (iii, iii, 210), in the Shakespearean part of the play; I find nothing in Oaxton to account for this (cf. the list of the Greeks on pp. 545–6). The verse agrees as nearly with that of the Shakespearean part of the play as we need expect in so short a passage (Small, 144), though there is a marked difference as to end-stop lines. Finally, the absence of the prologue from the Quarto is not due to its being a later addition; J. Q. Adams (Journ. Engl. and Germ. Philol., vii, p. 58) in an able article shows that it was probably put in the Folio to fill a blank page.

^{page 758 note 64} Who are very inconspicuous in the play, so it is not a case of a lesser motive giving way in order to emphasize a greater. This part may have been (rather weakly) written by Shakespeare to connect with the ending of the old play, when he saw he should have to keep it, or may have been retained from the old play (the rest of the speech rather looks so). The passage and context do not seem like the work of a continuator; but this is anticipating.

^{page 757 note 65} E.g., Small, Stage-Quarrel, p. 149. Fleay, (Life and Work of Shakespeare, pp. 24, 44) thinks that while most of the play dates from 1602, the prologue, the love-story and scenes iv-x of act v are from a play of about 1593, in which Shakespeare was only a coadjutor; cf. also Fleay in New Sh. Soc. Trans., 1874, pp. 304 ff. This view has found little favor. It is impossible that, as some have suggested, the play originally ended with v, iii, before Hector's death.

^{page 757 note 66} Collier, Verplanck, Dyce, Verity, White, and others; G. P. Baker (Devel. of S. as a Dram. Artist, p. 260); the editor of Schlegel and Tieck's translation (Berlin, 1877), xi, p. 172. The latter suggests, as evidence that another play intervened between Troilus and its ultimate sources, the absence of verbal likeness between them. Note also that it contains twice as many words peculiar to itself as most of the plays, about as many as the far longer Hamlet (cf. lists in the Irving edition). The fact that some of them are favorite words with Heywood further countenances the common-source theory.

^{page 757 note 67} There are other signs of this toward the end. No discreet critic would enter without searchings of heart on such a task as Hector's surprise that he has offended is rather naïf for Shakespeare. (Paris in I. A., 303, similarly reminds Menelaus of the latter's kind welcome of him in Sparta!) In I. A. I find no positive indication that an earlier play underlies it. Probably there is none in the great condensation of the love-story, and its curious telescoping in act iii (303–6). Visiting Troy during a truce, Calchas urges Cressida to abandon Troilus and take Diomed; she refuses, hesitates and consents; a page later it appears that Diomed's unhorsing of Troilus and sending the horse to Cressida has already occurred. This is carried over almost unchanged to the Troia Britanica (xiii, 14, 16, pp. 334–5); but it is made more intelligible, as if Heywood had now noticed the weakness, by an earlier passage (xi, 40–2; p. 251, page (numbers muddled). Heywood could not have omitted the celebrated love-story from Iron Age, but the play is so crowded that he had to condense.

^{page 758 note 68} Anders, Shakespeare's Books (Schriften d. deutschen Sh.-Gesellschaft, i), p. 42; Root, Class Myth. in S. (Yale Studies in Engl. xix), pp. 5–6. Lucrece, 1401 ff., is from Ovid and Virgil, to whom (especially Ovid) Shakespeare owed almost all his mythological knowledge (Root, p. 3).

^{page 759 note 69} Anders and Root, l. c.

^{page 759 note 70} One small further point; the hypothesis of a lost play agrees well with the facts as to the Welsh Troilus. The resemblances which I indicated (p. 705 above; Mod. Lang. Review, x, 279–80) to both Shakespeare's and Heywood's plays might be explained as due to their common source. But I feel no confidence as to this.

^{page 760 note 71} Ovid and Virgil are not used as chief sources, we have seen, as in the others, because Shakespeare does not treat, as they do, the beginning and end of the story. But the play does showincidental knowledge of Ovid and Virgil (Root, Class Myth, in S., p. 18).

^{page 760 note 72} Such as Rapp and Morton Luce.

^{page 761 note 73} Yet, so wrong-headed have critics been, one of them saw only scornful burlesque in the aged Nestor's gallant and touching message to Hector (298–9), “that my lady Was fairer than his grandam.” To the reader, Ulysses' account of Patroclus' mimicking (151 ff.) may seem undignified. But to the spectator, the dignity of what he sees and hears would prevent any such impression.

^{page 761 note 74} Shakespeare's preference for these scenes may have been a reaction against a certain childishness in Caxton; may be due to a feeling that the world is not conducted merely by the fighting which pleases the rabble.

^{page 761 note 75} Of course this has long been recognized by many critics, even as early as Guizot and Schlegel.

^{page 761 note 76} I have pointed out in the play a somewhat minute acquaintance with the Iliad; also that it may not have been due to Shakespeare.

^{page 762 note 77} To the modern he is the δ' Aχιλλ which Homer calls him, not the selfish skulker which the average early reader would think him in Homer and Caxton. He would seem grossly unchivalrous in Homer, to an age when the tradition of chivalry was still vivid. We have seen Shakespeare is probably not responsible for his final baseness, which is little greater than in Caxton.

^{page 762 note 78} Other arts than the literary were in transition in his day. In these scenes there is no more incongruity than in the odd architectural combination of classic and Gothic in the more or less contemporary church of St. Eustache in Paris, the Bodleian Library in Oxford, Burleigh House near Stamford, or in the classical porticoes of St. Mary the Virgin's in Oxford or of the old St. Paul's.

^{page 762 note 79} No character whom we should heed makes pessimistic speeches; there are no such despairing generalizations as are uttered by Hamlet, Macbeth, Lear.

^{page 763 note 80} Hector is the real hero of the play so far as it is serious and tragic, the hinge of the main action all through, who meets his death through the defects of his qualities, through his chivalrous sparing of Achilles (v, vi, 14; cf. v, iii, 40 and iv, v, 105), and disregard of Cassandra's and Andromache's warnings (v, iii). There is dramatic irony in the fact that in ii, ii, he had appealed to the other princes to heed the warnings of Cassandra.

^{page 763 note 81} Homer describes his deformity, and his reviling of the chiefs, especially Achilles and others; he is “the uncontrolled of speech, whose mind was full of words many and disorderly, wherewith to strive against the chiefs idly and in no good order, but even as he deemed that he should make the Argives laugh” (tr. by Lang and others).

^{page 764 note 82} Iron Age has far less of the love-story; the Admiral play, when complete, may have had as much, however.

^{page 764 note 83} He could no more have made her pure and attractive than he could have given Cleopatra what the elderly English ladies called the “home-life of our own dear Queen.” Cf. John Ford, Honor Trivmphant, p. 24 (Old Sh. Soc. xix); Willobie His Avisa, canti xviii, lxxii, and at the end; Whetstone's Rock of Regard (1576); Dekker's Wonderful Year (1603).

^{page 764 note 84} Cf. pander in Oxf. Dict.

^{page 764 note 85} Ulysses, the weightiest speaker in the play, calls him “a true knight,”

What a contrast to Troilus in his dealings with Cressida, Pandarus, and Diomed! Yet even as a lover he is not quite such a fool as some critics have thought him; there is no fluctuation in his outline. Why should he he expected to see through the sly-boots Cressida as the world-worn Ulysses does?

^{page 765 note 86} E. g., some delightful verses at the end of Caxton's Recuyell say the cause of the war was a

In a cryptic account by Dekker (1603) of a vulgar contemporary scandal the people are called Menelaus, Helen, Paris, Cressida (Wonderful Year, in Huth Libr., i, pp. 134–5). On Helen and Cressida cf. also A Gorgious Gallery of Gallant Inuentions (1578; in Collier's reprints), pp. 7–9, 18, 20, 48, 50, 58, 74, 102. To Shakespeare's Lucrece, Helen is “the strumpet that began this stir.” Anyone not wholly under Homer's spell would have momenta of amazement over the origin of the war. Horace had; see p. 767 below.

^{page 765 note 87} The prominence of the love-motive in the Admiral fragment, and Cressida's final degradation among the beggars, indicate that it was similarly treated there.

^{page 766 note 88} Such as the editor of Bell's edition (1774), Verplanck, Hebler, Raleigh.

^{page 766 note 89} This may account for certain internal inconsistencies (cf. Small, 149–50); which indeed are not wanting in some of his other plays, including the greatest. The chief one here, the fighting in i, ii and the long truce in i, iii, may be explained by artificial dramatic time.

^{page 767 note 90} Even Horace could sum up the Iliad thus:

Horace was neither embittered nor anti-classical, but he had no illusions. No more had Shakespeare.

^{page 768 note 91} There is evidence that even more than this, an actual spirit of contradiction toward Homer, such as some have fancied in Shakespeare, has gone into the material of the play; but this was many centuries before his time. Professor N. E. Griffin (Journ. Engl. Germ. Philol, vii, pp. 32–52) shows that Caxton's literary-ancestors, Dares and Dictys, take pains to slight and lower heroes magnified by Homer, and to substitute new ones of their own (pp. 45–6). This is no more than we find in other traditional sages, as witness the neglect or vilification of such primitive heroes as Charlemagne, Arthur, Percival, Gawain, in favor of their original subordinates or of such understudies as Galahad and Lancelot. The new-made hero bears, like the Turk, no brother near the throne.

^{page 768 note 92} A vain effort, for minute criticism of a literary work can always raise questions which none but the author could answer (and not always he, if we can believe Browning. Anecdotes to this effect are familiar, and I can add one which has never been printed, I believe. Mr. Charles Fry told me that when he was putting on The Blot on the Soutcheon at its first revival, during one of the rehearsals he said to Browning, “I'm afraid you will think me very stupid, but I don't understand this passage I have to speak.” Browning put on his glasses, looked at it, and said, “Dear me, I don't know what it means.” In such cases there may have been a little amiable pose, since Browning did not like to be taken too seriously as a literary man).

^{page 768 note 93} One question often raised is whether the play is a comedy or a tragedy. I asked it of Mr. Fry, the only Englishman in three centuries known to have put the play on. He said, “It's neither, it's just a play. A better answer is that it's both, it's a historical play. Shakespeare meant to give a mingled impression, and was prevented from unifying plot or feeling by the fact that the material was too well known to be much modified. There is absolutely no essential difference between the Troilus and Henry IV. The charm of seeing on the stage personages familiar in books and tradition atoned for the undramatic character of their story; we see such things today in such a play as Becky Sharp.

^{page 770 note 94} The older critics were mostly what the late William James called “tender-minded.” They would have been shocked at the idea that he ever did makeshift work, or (so to speak) did not pour out his whole soul in every line.