It 'MEASURE for Measure,' like 'The Merchant of Venice,' has been classed by Heminge and Condell, in the first part of their edition of Shakspeare's works, among the comedies.' But the subject upon which the play is founded is of so serious a nature, and treated by the poet with so much seriousness, the representation throughout borders so closely upon the domain of tragedy, and the comic parts are so decidedly left in the background, that the drama cannot altogether be called a comedy, at least, not in the same sense as the pieces already discussed. has more resemblance with those pieces which Shakspeare's earlier contemporaries-especially Beaumont and Fletcher -introduced upon the stage under the title of 'tragicomedies.' Shakspeare does not seem to have known, or not to have cared to adopt this title, perhaps from a right feeling that from an aesthetico-artistic point of view— great objection might be raised against the propriety of such an intermediate species between tragedy and comedy, which seemed rather like a hybrid production. And yet the difference, to which the above name refers, is brought so prominently forward in the character and the treatment of the subject, if not in the actual essence and nature of the poem, that we cannot fail to see it even though we may not be inclined to regard it as a distinct species of drama. It is much the same, as we shall see, with 'Cymheline;' I have therefore classed both dramas together, and have inserted them here as an appendage to the comedies and a point of transition to the historical dramas. 1. MEASURE FOR MEASURE. This piece was probably written at least seven years after The Merchant of Venice,' and the two dramas also differ very much both in tone and colouring.* And yet to judge from its ideal subject-matter, it shows the closest affinity to The Merchant of Venice;' at least, the basis upon which the whole is erected is the same, even though the structure itself bears a different character. A Duke of Vienna forms the resolution to exchange, for a time, his purple mantle for a monk's cowl, and, under the pretext of a distant and pressing journey, to leave his sceptre in the hands of another, in order meanwhile, in a state of incognito, to examine into the state of his dominions, and more especially into the mode and the effect of his representative's government. This plan may appear a capricious idea, and yet when examined more closely it has a well-founded motive both in the character and the position of the Duke. He is a man of warm affections for his fellow-creatures, and of high morality. Accordingly, he has hitherto exercised his power with clemency and indulgence; he fears with too much indulgence, for he has observed that vice and crime are alarmingly on the increase among his subjects. His wish was to ascertain whether his fears were well-founded, and also to correct his own mistakes, without appearing inconsistent or exposing himself to the reproach of punishing that, for which he * Tieck conjectured that it was written about 1612-partly on account of the language and style, partly because he thought he had found the piece to contain an allusion to the literary club which met at St. Dunstan's under the presidency of Ben Jonson. The deep sombre colouring of the piece also, that heavy, serious tone which is apparent in Shakspeare's later works and is already felt here, seemed to point to a late origin. In the first edition of this work, therefore, I shared Tieck's opinion. But it has been proved, through the Accounts of the Revels at Court (p. 204), published by Peter Cunningham, that Measure for Measure had been performed at Court on St. Stephen's night (Dec. 26), 1604; accordingly it must, at latest, have been written during the course of that year, but probably also, no earlier. And yet, for reasons already stated, I think that it was subsequently remodelled by Shakspeare, and considerably altered. Perhaps the ever-increasing rigorous spirit of the Puritans-with the r love of persecution and pharisaic pride of virtue-may, after the accession of James, have induced the poet to rehandle the subject, as well to remodel the drama; he might (when the nuisance continued to increase, after 1604) have laid on his colours more thickly, and thus renewed his attack more sharply. Measure for Measure did not appear in print till in the folio of 1623. was himself to blame; lastly he also wished to test the man whom he had chosen as his representative, and who had given him reason to doubt his moral character. Perhaps the Duke's object in trusting the supreme power to the earnest, zealous and sternly-virtuous Angelo, and in placing the gentle Escalus by his side in a subordinate position, may have been a longing for a short break in the everlasting monotony of state business, and a wish to obtain an opportunity for more closely observing his own surroundings, and those of his people and country. As was to be expected, Angelo exercises his deputed power with great rigour and apparent conscientiousness. At the very outset he revives an old and dormant law which threatens to punish all sexual sins with death, and causes an indeed extremely light-minded, but by no means vicious young nobleman, Claudio, to be thrown into prison, in order that, in accordance with the law, the sentence of death may be carried out upon him. The attempted deliverance, and final rescue of the young man by his sister with the Duke's assistance, forms the centre of the not very involved intrigue. And Angelo who makes such profession of strict moral integrity, who boasts of his virtue, who insists upon order and discipline, and inexorably persecutes sin and frailty in others, and doubtless has the good-will to be what he seems-he it is who falls from his arrogated height (and in a much worse manner) into the very crime which even contrary to his promised wordhe intended to punish with the utmost severity of the law. Having once yielded to human weakness, he becomes a worthless hypocrite and deceiver. For it is this pride of virtue which thinks, above all things, of its own reputation and fame among men, this moral arrogance, which is always satisfied with itself, this self-inflated assurance that most readily falls a victim to temptation; and it sinks the deeper the more it endeavours to save external appearances. That the hypocrite is finally unmasked by the counter-intrigue of the Duke (which is favoured by accident), but pardoned for the sake of the faithful Mariana, whom Angelo had forsaken; that Claudio is saved, and his truly virtuous sister rewarded for her magnanimity; that the frivolous chatterbox Lucio is put to open shame, and the pimping clown Pompey gets a severe rebuke--these turns of the action bring the piece as close to the domain of comedy, as it is removed from it by the tone and colour of the representation. From these indications alone it will readily be seen where the internal centre of the artistic organism is to be found. Strict virtue and pure morality are certainly-as every one knows the basis and end of human existence. But they are this only when accompanied by love, that inner and close communion of spirit which embraces all men, and which is one and the same thing as the idea of humanity which has so often been misunderstood. Outward, strictly moral virtue, which in all cases thinks only of the observances of the law, of the final consequence and effect, which is something apart from love, which confounds morality with outward righteousness, and accounts this righteousness a merit, this pharisaic virtue is in truth no virtue, is nothing but a glittering soap-bubble, that bursts with the first breath of temptation. It is not virtuousness in this sense, not the outward lawful commissions and omissions, but that purity of heart, that integrity of the moral spirit which despises sin, but pities and tries to save the sinner; in short, love is the soul of all moral relations, and combines strictness with clemency and forbearance. This is the true foundation of human life, for it is only in and through the exercise of love that human virtue is possible, and, in fact, a virtue at all; we here have the same truth that is maintained in 'The Merchant of Venice,' in face of justice. And if it be true that it is through love alone that man has the power of being virtuous and acting virtuously, and that he stands firm only in the fear of, at any moment, being liable to fall himself, then he is bound to show his fallen and penitent brother mercy instead of justice, and forgiveness instead of punishment. Shakspeare expresses this sentiment in the beautiful words (of Isabella) (ii. 2): 'Alas, alas! Why, all the souls that were, were forfeit once; But judge you as you are? O, think on that, and again in the eloquent lamentation of the same Isabella, a passage of sublime pathos: 'Could great men thunder As Jove himself does, Jove would ne'er be quiet, Would use his heaven for thunder: Nothing but thunder. Merciful heaven! Thou rather, with thy sharp and sulphurous bolt Most ignorant of what he's most assured, Plays such fantastic tricks before high Heaven, When the deeply significant poem so fully explains its own character, it would be presumption to add another word on the subject. All that remains for me to do, is to point out the manner in which the meaning of the whole is reflected in the various parts, in the characters, situations and relations. I have already intimated this as regards the principal moments of the action, which turn upon the conduct of Angelo (whose utter worthlessness required to be exposed, and which could be done only by the deception played upon him by Isaeblla and Mariana with the Duke's assistance), upon Claudio's danger and deliverance, and upon the doings of the Duke and Isabella, the representatives of true virtue The chief characters are the Duke, Angelo and Isabella. The first two are so clearly and sharply delineated, the fundamental features of their natures, the motives of their actions so dictinctly brought forward, that they do not stand in need of any further explanation. It is equally clear that they represent the two poles of the contrast, the reconciliation of which is the subject in question: the Duke is clemency and forbearance, forgiveness and mercy; Angelo the severity of the law, the rigour and the pride of virtue and selfrighteousness. More difficult is the understanding of |