his 
epitaphs. An interesting sidelight is this on the character of this 
redoubtable and rugged satirist, that he should thus have befriended and 
tenderly remembered these little theatrical waifs, some of whom (as we 
know) had been literally kidnapped to be pressed into the service of the 
theatre and whipped to the conning of their difficult parts. To the 
caricature of Daniel and Munday in "Cynthia's Revels" must be added 
Anaides (impudence), here assuredly Marston, and Asotus (the 
prodigal), interpreted as Lodge or, more perilously, Raleigh. Crites, like 
Asper-Macilente in "Every Man Out of His Humour," is Jonson's 
self-complaisant portrait of himself, the just, wholly admirable, and 
judicious scholar, holding his head high above the pack of the yelping 
curs of envy and detraction, but careless of their puny attacks on his 
perfections with only too mindful a neglect. 
The third and last of the "comical satires" is "Poetaster," acted, once 
more, by the Children of the Chapel in 1601, and Jonson's only avowed 
contribution to the fray. According to the author's own account, this 
play was written in fifteen weeks on a report that his enemies had 
entrusted to Dekker the preparation of "Satiromastix, the Untrussing of 
the Humorous Poet," a dramatic attack upon himself. In this attempt to 
forestall his enemies Jonson succeeded, and "Poetaster" was an 
immediate and deserved success. While hardly more closely knit in 
structure than its earlier companion pieces, "Poetaster" is planned to 
lead up to the ludicrous final scene in which, after a device borrowed 
from the "Lexiphanes" of Lucian, the offending poetaster, 
Marston-Crispinus, is made to throw up the difficult words with which 
he had overburdened his stomach as well as overlarded his vocabulary. 
In the end Crispinus with his fellow, Dekker-Demetrius, is bound over 
to keep the peace and never thenceforward "malign, traduce, or detract
the person or writings of Quintus Horatius Flaccus [Jonson] or any 
other eminent man transcending you in merit." One of the most 
diverting personages in Jonson's comedy is Captain Tucca. "His 
peculiarity" has been well described by Ward as "a buoyant 
blackguardism which recovers itself instantaneously from the most 
complete exposure, and a picturesqueness of speech like that of a 
walking dictionary of slang." 
It was this character, Captain Tucca, that Dekker hit upon in his reply, 
"Satiromastix," and he amplified him, turning his abusive vocabulary 
back upon Jonson and adding "An immodesty to his dialogue that did 
not enter into Jonson's conception." It has been held, altogether 
plausibly, that when Dekker was engaged professionally, so to speak, 
to write a dramatic reply to Jonson, he was at work on a species of 
chronicle history, dealing with the story of Walter Terill in the reign of 
William Rufus. This he hurriedly adapted to include the satirical 
characters suggested by "Poetaster," and fashioned to convey the satire 
of his reply. The absurdity of placing Horace in the court of a Norman 
king is the result. But Dekker's play is not without its palpable hits at 
the arrogance, the literary pride, and self-righteousness of 
Jonson-Horace, whose "ningle" or pal, the absurd Asinius Bubo, has 
recently been shown to figure forth, in all likelihood, Jonson's friend, 
the poet Drayton. Slight and hastily adapted as is "Satiromastix," 
especially in a comparison with the better wrought and more significant 
satire of "Poetaster," the town awarded the palm to Dekker, not to 
Jonson; and Jonson gave over in consequence his practice of "comical 
satire." Though Jonson was cited to appear before the Lord Chief 
Justice to answer certain charges to the effect that he had attacked 
lawyers and soldiers in "Poetaster," nothing came of this complaint. It 
may be suspected that much of this furious clatter and give-and-take 
was pure playing to the gallery. The town was agog with the strife, and 
on no less an authority than Shakespeare ("Hamlet," ii. 2), we learn that 
the children's company (acting the plays of Jonson) did "so berattle the 
common stages. . .that many, wearing rapiers, are afraid of goose-quills, 
and dare scarce come thither." 
Several other plays have been thought to bear a greater or less part in 
the war of the theatres. Among them the most important is a college 
play, entitled "The Return from Parnassus," dating 1601-02. In it a
much-quoted passage makes Burbage, as a character, declare: "Why 
here's our fellow Shakespeare puts them all down; aye and Ben Jonson, 
too. O that Ben Jonson is a pestilent fellow; he brought up Horace, 
giving the poets a pill, but our fellow Shakespeare hath given him a 
purge that made him bewray his credit." Was Shakespeare then 
concerned in this war of the stages? And what could have been the 
nature of this "purge"? Among several suggestions, "Troilus and 
Cressida" has been thought by some to be the play in which 
Shakespeare thus    
    
		
	
	
	Continue reading on your phone by scaning this QR Code
	 	
	
	
	    Tip: The current page has been bookmarked automatically. If you wish to continue reading later, just open the 
Dertz Homepage, and click on the 'continue reading' link at the bottom of the page.