LITERARY HISTORY.

The date of As You Like It can be fixed with approximate closeness: it was probably written in 1600, the evidence in favour of that date being as follows. On the registers of the Stationers' Company occurs this entry:

4 Augusti

As like yt/a booke you

Henry the ffift/a booke

Euery man in his humour/a booke To be staied. The commedie of muche A doo about

nothing a booke/

Unfortunately the year is not given; the date, however, of the previous entry is May 27, 1600, and we know that the other plays mentioned in the list were printed in 1600 and 1601; it seems, therefore, a fair inference to conclude that the undated entry should be referred to 1600, and that year in all likelihood saw the production of this most delightful comedy. Of other incidental points of testimony that support this conjecture several are worth noting. As You Like It is not mentioned in Mere's Palladis Tamia: hence it cannot have been printed prior to 1598. Again, in act iii. scene 5 we have the oft-quoted line from Marlowe's Hero and Leander: "Who ever loved that loved not at first sight?" Marlowe's poem was published in 1598. There are other less satisfactory pieces of internal evidence: e.g. in i. 2. 94: "for since the little wit that fools have was silenc'd," Mr. Fleay finds an allusion to "the burning of satirical books by public authority, 1st June, 1599." Malone, too, has pointed out that the expression “like Diana in the fountain" (iv. 1. 134) may be a reference to the "curiously-wrought tabernacle of grey marble, and in the same an image alabaster of Diana, and water conveyed from the Thames prilling from her naked breast," which,

VOL. IV.

according to Stow-whose words we have just quoted-was set up in 1596.

Combining these individual points, and emphasizing the importance of the entry on the stationers' registers, we may, I think, with tolerable safety assign the composition and production of As You Like It to the year 1600; with 1599 (late) as a possible, though not very plausible, alternative.

It will have been noticed that the play was "stayed;" i.e. a proviso was made against its being printed. Mr. Aldis Wright ingeniously suggests that this may have been because the piece was not properly finished, and he points out that even in its present state, or rather as given in the Folio of 1623-where, by the way, it seems to have been first published— there are slight signs of hurry and carelessness. For instance in the first scene the second son of Sir Rowland is called Jaques; at the end he is introduced as the "second brother," for fear, no doubt, that he might be confounded with the melancholy Jaques; this is unlike Shakespeare's usually careful method. Again, in i. 2. 284, Le Beau's reply to Orlando: 66 but yet indeed the taller is his daughter," is a significant slip; for in the very next scene Rosalind says of herself: "because that I am more than common tall." And there are other trifling touches that point the same way.

To turn now to the source of the play. For the main incidents of his comedy-romance Shakespeare drew (with his accustomed freedom) upon a novel by Lodge. Lodge's story -itself a partial reminiscence of the Tale of Gamelyn, often ascribed to Chaucer- was published in 1590 and again in 1592; the full title being, "Rosalynde; Euphues Golden Legacie: found after his death in his cell at Silexedra. Bequeathed to Philautus Sonnes,

noursed up with their Father in England." ; In the introduction Lodge tells us that he "fell from books to arms," and sailed with Captain Clarke to the island of Terceras and the Canaries; writing his euphuistic pastoral to beguile the dulness of the voyage; so that, in his own charming phrase, “every line was writ with a surge, and every humorous passion counter-checkt with a storme. If You Like it, so; and yet I will be yours in duty, if you will be mine in favour." The words italicized need no comment. It may be worth while to observe that in the editions of Lodge's novel prior to 1598 the name Rosalind does not appear on the title-page, the addition being subsequently made on account, no doubt, of the popularity of Shakespeare's play. How closely Shakespeare followed his authority, the extracts from Rosalynde which I have given in the notes will sufficiently show. As to points of divergence, the two dukes are not brothers in the novel; the episode of Aliena's rescue from robbers is omitted in the play; in Lodge's version of the forest scenes Rosalind and Celia pass for a lady and her page; and-most important variationAudrey, Jaques, and Touchstone are altogether creations of the dramatist.

To the history of the play there is nothing further to be added, except indeed to mention the tradition that Shakespeare himself acted the part of Adam, a tradition which is pleasant enough and upon which every one will remember Coleridge's comment, but which may be a tradition et præterea nihil.

others having known the hand of the restorer, the turn of As You Like It came. A certain Charles Johnson-of whom we are only told that he was fat "and famous for writing a play every year and being at Buttons every day”—produced at Drury Lane, with a strong cast that included Cibber (Jaques), Wilks (Orlando), Booth (the banished Duke), Theophilus Cibber (Le Beau), and Mrs. Booth (Rosalind), a by no means "respectful perversion" of Shakespeare's faultless comedy. The new piece was called Love in a Forest, and from Genest's account of it—which I venture to borrow--we get a good idea of the splendid courage of the last-century adapters of Shakespeare, and, still more, of the callousness of literary opinion which tolerated such massacres of the flawless and innocent. "Love in a Forest," says Genest, iii. 100, "altered from As You Like It: this is a bad alteration of Shakespeare's play by Charles Johnsonhe entirely omits the characters of Touchstone, Audrey, William, Corin, Phoebe and Sylvius, except that the last, in act 2nd, speaks about 18 lines which belong to Corin. Johnson supplies the deficiency from some of Shakespeare's other plays, adding something, but not a vast deal, of his own. Act 1st. The wrestling between Orlando and Charles is turned into a regular combat in the listsCharles accuses Orlando of treason, several speeches are introduced from Richard II. Act 2nd. When Duke Alberto enters with his friend, the speech about the wounded stag is very properly taken from the first Lord and given to Jaques-in the next scene between the same parties, notwithstanding Touchstone is omitted, yet Jaques gives the description of his meeting with a fool—much, however, of his part in this scene is left out very injudiciously, as is still the case when As You Like It is acted. Act 3rd. The verses which Calia ought to read are omitted, and Touchstone's burlesque verses are given her instead when Orlando and Jaques enter, they begin their conversation as in the original, and end it with part of the 1st Act of Much Ado, Jaques speaking what Benedick says about women - when Rosalind and Cælia come forward, Jaques walks off with Cælia

Rosalind omits the account of Time's different paces-Jaques returns with Cælia and makes love to her-after which he has a soliloquy patched up from Benedick and Touchstone, with some additions from C. Johnson. Act 4th begins with a conversation between Jaques and Rosalind, in which he tells her of his love to Cælia-in the scene between Orlando and Rosalind considerable omissions are made, and Viola's speech ('she never told her love') is inserted-Robert (Jaques) de Bois brings the bloody napkin to Rowland, instead of Oliver, who does not appear after the 1st act. Robert says that he (not Oliver) was the person rescued from the lioness-that Oliver had killed himself-the act concludes with the 2nd scene of Shakespeare's 5th act, in which Rosalind desires all the parties on the stage to meet her to-morrow. Jaques and Cælia are made in some way to supply the place of Sylvius and Phoebe. Act 5th consists chiefly of the burlesque Tragedy of Pyramus and Thisbe from Midsummer Night's Dream; this is represented before the Duke, while Rosalind is changing her dress, instead of Touchstone's description of the quarrel. When Rosalind returns the play ends much as in the original-except that Jaques marries Cælia instead of going in quest of Duke Frederickand that the Epilogue is omitted."--Genest, Some Account of the English Stage, vol. iii. p. 100-102.

It is a comfort to know that this preposterous pasticcio (dedicated, by the way, to "The Worshipful Society of Freemasons") only held the stage for six nights.

In 1740, for the first time, As You Like It was restored to the boards; produced on December 20th, it was acted some twentyfive times, a considerable success in those days. The cast was excellent: Jaques, Quin; Silvius, Woodward; Celia, Mrs. Clive; and Rosalind, Mrs. Pritchard - not to mention others. This revival (Genest iii. 627) took place at Drury Lane, and two years later, January 8, 1742, we find Covent Garden following the lead of its rival; the Rosalind again being Mrs. Pritchard, with Ryan as Jaques (Genest, iv. 5). Mrs. Pritchard was great as Rosalind, her chief competitor being

Peg Woffington, who made her entry in the part at Drury Lane, in 1747; the Touchstone on that occasion was Macklin, with Kitty Clive as Celia. We may note in passing that it was while playing in As You Like It that Peg Woffington was struck down by paralysis; garrulous Tate Wilkinson gives us a graphic account of the painful "last scene of all."

Excluded by unfriendly space, I cannot describe in detail all the revivals mentioned by Genest; here, however, are the dates. October 22, 1767, at Drury Lane: Touchstone, King; Orlando, Palmer; Celia, Mrs. Baddeley; Rosalind, Mrs. Dancer (i.e. Barry), whom some people preferred to Mrs. Pritchard and Mrs. Woffington. April 5, 1771, at Covent Garden; January 24, 1775, Covent Garden, the play-bill announcing that the "cuckoo song," from Love's Labour's Lost, would be introduced; December 17, 1779, Covent Garden; July 4th, 1783, Haymarket; April 30th, 1785, Drury Lane. This last was a very important event: it was the début in the part of Rosalind of the great Mrs. Siddons. Was she a success? Who could say? The town was divided, and the friendships of a lifetime were dissolved, over this vexing question. Her biographer Boaden boldly says (ii. 167): "Rosalind was one of the most delicate achievements of Mrs. Siddons. The common objection to her comedy, that it was only the smile of tragedy, made the express charm of Rosalind - her vivacity is understanding, not buoyant spirits." There is much truth in this: unfortunately play-goers had grown accustomed to the stage Rosalind of the romping type, and even those who prided themselves on being nothing if not critical were dissatisfied with what seemed coldness and want of spontaneity in the great actress. Hear, for instance, the dicta plusquam Johnsoniana of the epically eloquent Miss Seward: "For the first time I saw the justly celebrated Mrs. Siddons in comedy, in Rosalind; but though her smile is as enchanting as her frown is magnificent, as her tears are irresistible, yet the playful scintillations of colloquial wit, which most mark that character, suit not the dignity of the Siddonian countenance." Genest, vi. 341, writes to the same effect: "Mrs.

Siddons did not add to her reputation by her performance of Rosalind, and when Mrs. Jordan had played the character, few persons wished to see Mrs. Siddons in it." This brings us to the greatest of eighteenth-century Rosalinds: in point of popularity, if not of actual merit, Mrs. Jordan seems to have been unrivalled; it was Eclipse first, and the rest, if not nowhere, at least next by a very long interval indeed. Her first appearance in the part was on April 13, 1787, for her own benefit; and she was triumphantly successful. "Her laugh and her voice," says Boaden (Life of Kemble, i. 428), were irresistible;" Shakespeare himself, to quote Campbell's magnificent compliment, would have gone behind the scenes to congratulate her. It was always one of Mrs. Jordan's favourite and best parts, and we should like to have been present at a certain première at Drury Lane on May 12, 1797, when the play-bill read as follows: Touchstone, Bannister, junior; Orlando, Barrymore; Jaques, Palmer; Rosalind, Mrs. Jordan; Celia, Miss Mellon; Audrey, Miss Pope. Miss Pope, by the way, often played Rosalind.

To follow the fortunes of As You Like It in this century were a long story. It must be sufficient to mention that Kemble played, in 1805, Jaques to the Orlando of Charles Kemble; that Miss Tree was a not inglorious Rosalind; that as actress and critic Helen Faucit has interpreted the same part with equal mastery and magic; and that As You Like It was among the Shakesperean revivals of Macready.1

Turning to quite modern times, we may mention the production of the play at the Opera Comique Theatre in 1875, when Mrs. Kendal first appeared as Rosalind, the Orlando being Mr. Kendal, with Mr. Herman Vezin as Jaques; ten years later very much the same cast was representing As You Like It at the St. James Theatre; and in the interval-in 1880-had taken place the brilliantly successful revival at the Imperial Theatre. On the last occasion the Rosalind was Miss Litton.

1 See Macready's Diaries, vol. ii. p. 203, where Sir Frederick Pollock gives the cast: Rosalind, Mrs. Nisbett; Celia, Mrs. Stirling; William, Compton; Adam, Phelps; the banished Duke, Ryder, etc.

In concluding we may mention, as an unconsidered trifle of some interest, that, thanks to the effort of the Pastoral Players, Rosalind and Orlando have met and made love, if not in a veritable forest of Arden-where are such fairy lands to be found?-at least, sub Jove frigido.

CRITICAL REMARKS.

As You Like It is not one of Shakespeare's greatest plays; it is merely one of his most delightful works, delightful alike to reader and to critic, if only on account of its perfect simplicity of motive. We are out in the open air; we hear the wind rustling in the fragrant leaves of the fairy-land of Arden; and we are far too lazy and too genially contented to think of purposes, and leading ideas, and things philosophic. We take the play as it is, without peering beneath the surface for subtle significance, and never once does Touchstone's query rise to our lips-"hast any philosophy in thee?" only the most Teutonic of Teutons would look for a tendenz in this fantastic study of an impossible Arcadia, a pastoral Utopia which "never was on sea or land." For As You Like It is, I take it, from beginning to end, purely ideal; the characters, or some of them, we may possibly have met, but their life and environment exist only in the fine frenzy of the poet. And we need not wonder that it should be so, not at any rate if we remember when the play was written. It came immediately after the great historic trilogy. Shakespeare had sounded forth to all the world the silver note of patriotism, had carried men's minds back from a splendid present to an equally splendid and imperishable past, and made an incomparable appeal to the old and eternally fresh sentiment-pro focis et aris. And now he hangs up his arms in the temple of the goddess of war, and steeps himself in the freshness and fairness of a life where sorrow and sin are not, where truth is on every shepherd's tongue, where the time fleets by as it did in the golden days of Saturn, where destiny herself deigns to smile, and where the thought of each and all is-"Come live with me and be my love." Such the mise-en-scène, such the atmosphere of careless