LEWES MACHIN was assisted, as he states, in writing this play, by one "whose worth hath been often approved," and it is singular that until very recently the name of his coadjutor should have remained unknown, when in the Garrick Collection, always accessible in the British Museum, is a copy of The Dumb Knight, of 1608, with the name of his "partner in the wrong," on the title page, viz. Jervis or Gervase Markham.* Another copy, with the same distinction, was sold in Mr. Rhodes' Collection. Why it was afterwards altered cannot now be ascertained; perhaps Markham wished to avoid the consequences of the " strange constructions" on the play, to which Machin in his epistle refe.s, and therefore withdrew his name. Nevertheless the address of Machin," to the understanding reader," is prefixed to the copies, with and without the name of his assistant.

Although Markham was a voluminous writer, little or nothing is known regarding the events of his life. A curious anecdote of a Gervase Markham is quoted by Sir E. Brydges, in his edition of Phillips's Theatrum Poetarum, p. 279; but in all probability it is not the same individual, as that person was high sheriff of Nottinghamshire, in 1625, and was robbed of £5000. Gervase Markham, the poet and book-maker never could have possessed any such sum. He is said to have been the son of Robert Markham of Cotham, but this is very questionable. When and where he was born and died yet remains to be discovered. He began his career of authorship late in the reign of Elizabeth, viz. in 1595, when he published "The most honorable

*In the catalogue of the printed library, The Dumb Knight is placed under Markham's name, so that the first reference would have led to the discovery. However, this catalogue is not always to be trusted, and it is not wonderful that in so numerous and varied a collection, mistakes should occur. Among others connected with this subject, we may notice, that a play called A Contention between Liberality and Prodigality, printed in 1602, is assigned to Shirley, when he was not born until about 1594, and consequently was not then more than eight or nine years old.

tragedie of Sir Richard Grinvile (Grenville), knight," a small 8vo. of extreme rarity, which sold among the books of the late Mr. Bindley for more than £40. By this work he seems to have acquired much reputation.* Though called a tragedy, it is only a narrative and elegiac poem in the octave rhime.

Ritson also assigns to Markham a translation of Solomon's Song, in the same year, but it has only the initials L. M. on the title page. In 1597, he printed a translation from the French, called "Devoreux Vertues Tears for the loss of the most Christian King Henry III." In 1608 appeared a translation of Ariosto's Satires, with his name on the title page, but the work was subsequently claimed by Robert Toftes. The blame belonged, perhaps, to some knavish bookseller, who having obtained the MS. availed himself of Markham's popularity. A tract written by B. Rich, was also, not long afterwards, reprinted as the production of Markham. He continued to write various works, some on agriculture and farriery, until the middle of the 17th century. His only other dramatic performance was a tragedy called Herod and Antipater, which was printed in 1622, and in the composition of which he was joined by W. Sampson.

Of Lewes Machin, merely the name has come down to us in connection with Markham and with William Barksted. The latter, in 1607, printed Mirrha the Mother of Adonis, and at the end of it were placed "three Eglogs," by Lewes Machin. The first of" Me

* Charles Fitzgeoffry writing a similar poem on Sir Francis Drake, in 1596, thus mentions Markham's work.

"Well hath this poet royalis'd his facts

"And curiouslie describ'd his tragedie;

"In lasting characters of memorie,

Quaintlie he hath eternized his acts

"Even co-eternal with eternitie:

"So that the world envies his happie state,
"That he should live when it is ruinate."

A person of the name of Robert Markham wrote and printed in 1628, "A Description of that ever to be famed Knight Sir John "Burgh." Whether he was in any way related to Gervase Markham is not known.

375

nalcas and Daphnis," and the two others of " Apollo and Hyacinth." It is impossible now to ascertain what share he had in The Dumb Knight, which appears to have been a successful play, although its merits are by no means conspicuous. It is mentioned in the following terms in Shirley's Example, 1637, A. 4.

If

"Vainman. You will give me leave to answer you. you should ask me any thing?

Jacintha. Not a syllable,

Though I desir'd to know what o'clock 'tis; There's your obedience: at six months' end may reward your silence.

I

"Pumice-stone. She'll make him the Dumb Knight. "Jacintha. I will not engage you to be a mute so long."

The Dumb Knight was entered on the stationers' books, on the 6th Oct. 1608, in which year it was first printed. It was reprinted in 1633, perhaps on its revival at one of the theatres, which led Shirley to allude to it in 1637. The edition of 1633, is a copy of that of 1608, with all the original errors, and the addition of some others. It sometimes happens that an obscure reading is explained or a misprint corrected in later copies, even if the mistakes generally are multiplied; but this is not the case with The Dumb Knight. Mr. Reed seems to have used the edition of 1633, and therefore included most of the errors of both of the old copies. He also introduced several conjectural alterations of his own, and in a manner not easily justified, since he gave no intimation of the liberty he had taken with the author. The play has now for the first time been carefully collated, and the more important variations pointed out in the notes.

TO THE UNDERSTANDING READER.

RUMOUR, that Hydra-headed monster, with more tongues than eyes, by help of his intelligencer Envy, hath made strange constructions on this Dumb Knight, which then could not answer for himself: but now this publication doth unty his tongue, to answer the objections of all sharp critical censures, which heretofore have undeservedly pass'd upon him. And for my part, I protest, the wrongs I have received by some (whose worths I will not traduce) with a mild neglect I have laugh'd at their follies; for I think myself happy, because I have been envy'd, since the best now in grace have been subject to some slanderous tongues that want worth themselves, and think it great praise to them to detract praise from others that deserve it; yet having a partner in the wrong, whose worth hath been often approved, I count the wrong but half a wrong, because he knows best how to answer for himself: but I now in his absence make this apology, both for him and me. Thus leaving you and the book together, I ever rest yours.

LEWES MACHIN.