The object of the "Ecclesiastical Polity" is to defend the Episcopalian form of Church government. This is done without any partisan heat, with far-reaching scholarship, and with a studious desire to do justice to opponents. The sonorous roll of the sentences is well adapted to the dignity of the subject, and makes the work attractive to many who care little for the arguments it contains, but who read it for purely literary reasons. It is very seldom that a work of controversial theology (for so Hooker's may be called) can, like the "Ecclesiastical Polity," claim a permanent place in literature. Such works may be interesting to the historian of the history of opinion or to the theological student, but they are "caviare to the general" Sir Walter Raleigh (1552-1618), one of those dashing, adventurous courtiers who surrounded the throne of Elizabeth, and who by their half- exploring, half- piratical voyages did much to make the name of England terrible on the seas and to advance its prosperity, found time, in the course of his chequered career, to acquire a rich store of book knowledge and to cultivate his naturally fine literary taste. If he had devoted a larger portion of his time to literature, and had chosen themes of more enduring interest, he would probably have occupied a place next to Hooker as the greatest prose-writer of the Elizabethan era. Raleigh's principal work is his "History of the World," composed during his long imprisonment in the Tower by King James. Though only a fragment, it is a gigantic fragment, comprising the history of the world from the creation to about a century and a half before the birth of Christ, a period of nearly four thousand years. A considerable part of the work is rather theological and philosophical than historical, dealing with such topics as the being and attributes of God, the origin of government, the personages of Scripture as compared with the personages of heathen mythology, &c. The finest passage by far in the work is the conclusion :— "It is therefore death alone that can suddenly inake man to know himself. He tells the proud and insolent that they are but abjects, and humbles them at the instant; makes them cry, complain, and repent; yea, even to hate their forepassed 1 happiness. He takes the account of the rich, and proves him a beggar; a naked beggar that hath interest in nothing but in the gravel that fills his mouth. He holds a glass before the eyes of the most beautiful, and makes them see therein their deformity and rottenness, and they acknowledge it. "O eloquent, just, and mighty Death! whom none could advise, thou hast persuaded; what none hath dared, thou hast done; and whom all the world hath flattered, thou only hast cast out of the world and despised: thou hast drawn together all the far-stretched greatness, all the pride, cruelty, and ambition of man, and covered it all over with those two narrow words, Hic jacet." This magnificent apostrophe to death has been universally admired; but his disappointment would be great who began to read the "History of the World" expecting to find it all of the same texture as this familiar passage. A great proportion of it is bald and dry enough. Raleigh's other chief works are his "Discovery of the Large, Rich, and Beautiful Empire of Guiana," and his "Advice to his Son." The former, which contains passages showing considerable descriptive power, was very unjustly described by Hume as "full of the grossest and most palpable lies that were ever attempted to be imposed on the credulity of mankind." Hume ought to have observed that all the more marvellous particulars are related by Raleigh solely upon the authority of Spanish writers. The character of Raleigh's "Advice to his Son" was very well given by Carlyle: "Worldly wise, sharp, far-seeing. The motto, 'Nothing like getting on.'" The last prose-writer of the Elizabethan era that we shall mention deserves notice rather, perhaps, as a curious literary phenomenon than on account of his instrinsic merits. John Lyly (1554-1606), "the only rare poet of that time, the witty, comical, facetiously quick and unparalleled," as he was described, adopted, by the publication of his "Euphues, the Anatomy of Wit" (1579), a species of writing which at once found favour among fashionable circles, who loved elaborate phraseology and playing upon words. The first part was followed in 1580 by a second, called "Euphues and his Eng land." The work describes the travels of Euphues, a young Athenian, first in Naples and afterwards in England, and contains discourses on education, friendship, love, and such-like subjects. In many ways it is a pleasing book: "as brave, righteous, and pious a book," said Charles Kingsley, "as any man need desire to look into." But it is also full of affectation; sense is sacrificed to sound, similitudes and parallels of all sorts are lugged in whether or not they are relevant to the matter in hand. Alluding to Lyly's use of comparisons ransacked from every quarter, Drayton compliments Sidney as the author that "Did first reduce Our tongue from Lyly's writing, then in use; As the English apes and very zanies be Of everything that they do hear or see." Like More's "Utopia," Lyly's "Euphues" gave a new word to the language. "Euphuism," by which is generally meant an affected mode of writing, full of verbal ingenuities, forced comparisons, and painful elaboration of style, was common among the court circles of Elizabeth's time, having, it is thought, been imported from Italy by travelled scholars.1 Lyly can scarcely claim to have originated the style; he merely gave it literary form, and linked it to matter of considerable permanent value. Euphuism was ridiculed by Shakespeare in "Love's Labour's Lost," in which he good-humouredly laughs at the affected love-phraseology then current; and Scott, in his character of Sir Piercie Shafton, endeavoured to reproduce the forgotten dialect, with, however, very slender success. Besides his prose works, Lyly wrote several plays, being, indeed, one of the most distinguished of the pre-Shakespearean group of dramatists. As in Greece, so in England, the drama 1 According to Professor F. Landmann, in his essay "Euphuismus” (Giessen, 1880), Euphuism was simply an adaptation of the alto estilo of Guevara, a Spanish writer, all of whose books were translated in English in Queen Elizabeth's time; and Lyly adapted his "Euphues" from Guevara. Miracle Plays & Mysteries. 69 had its origin in religion. During the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, Miracle plays and Mysteries afforded one of the favourite entertainments of the common people. "Miracle plays, in the strict sense of the term, were dramatic representations of miracles performed by saints; Mysteries of incidents from the New Testament and elsewhere, bearing upon the fundamental principles of Roman Catholicism." The distinction, however, was not strictly observed. Monks were the authors of these plays, and they were acted "in the churches, or on stages erected in the churchyard or in the fields, or, as at Coventry, on movable stages wheeled from street to street." The actors were sometimes the brethren of a monastery, sometimes the members of a trade guild. Though Miracle plays were no doubt written with a moral purpose, we often find that in their desire to be amusing and instructive at the same time, the writers of them permitted the amusing element to overbalance the instructive one. The liberty often taken with Scriptural personages for the sake of comic effect, and the frequent buffoonery and ribaldry found in the plays, strange though they seem to modern readers, were no doubt eminently attractive to the rude crowd that witnessed the performances; but they can scarcely have tended to its edification or improvement. "So far," writes Professor Minto, "from helping to make demons more terrible, the Mysteries embodied the hideous ideals of the popular imagination, and raised temporary laughter by making them ridiculous-treated them for the time being as so much ludicrous capital. If superstitious fears had been absolutely bodiless before then -if the Mysteries had been the means of clothing the devil in popular imagination with claws, hoofs, horns, and tail-it might have been argued that they did add to the dreadful attributes of his fallen majesty. And even as it is, it may reasonably be maintained that the actual representation of the hideous being had a permanent effect of terror. I am inclined, however, to believe that the Mysteries left the fear of the devil where they found it, and simply provided the vulgar with a good day's sport." From the Miracle play it was an easy transition to the Morality, in which the characters were personified virtues and vices, such as Folly, Repentance, Avarice, &c. By degrees the vices and virtues came to be represented by persons who stood for a type of these, Brutus representing Patriotism, Aristides, Justice, and so on. Plays of this description and Moralities were largely taken advantage of by both Catholics and Protestants to enforce their several views. It is obvious that it is only a single step from Moralities in their latter form to the regular drama; though whether the true modern drama arose out of them or from the Latin classical drama may be doubted. At any rate, the first English comedy was written by a classical scholar, who found his model in Terence, and owed nothing to the writers of Moralities. Nicholas Udall, sometime headmaster of Eton, and renowned for the thorough manner in which he had laid to heart Solomon's maxim about sparing the rod and spoiling the child, was its author. It is called "Ralph Roister Doister," and was first printed in 1566, but is known to have been written several years previously. Divided into acts and scenes, and furnished with a regular plot, it marks a great advance upon the plays which had hitherto gratified the thirst of the people for dramatic representation. It is written in rough verse, and is pervaded by a sort of schoolboy fun, which would seem to suggest that it was originally written for representation by the author's pupils. The first English tragedy, "Gorboduc," mainly the work of Thomas Sackville, was represented in 1562. It, too, is framed upon classical models. In literary merit it is superior to "Ralph Roister Doister;" its blank verse is grave and weighty, and of considerable poetical merit; but it is difficult to believe that it could ever have been popular as an acting play; the unmerciful length at which many of the characters speak alone must have been a severe trial to the strength of the actors and the patience of the auditors. We now come to those who laid the foundations of the modern stage. Of these, the ingenious author of “Euphues” was the first. He was the author of no fewer than nine pieces, |