M. SIMROCK, ON THE PLOTS OF SHAKESPEARE'S PLAYS. I. ROMEO AND JULIET. The unhappy amour of Romeo and Juliet is related by Girolamo de la Corte, in his Historia di Verona, (Veron. 1594, 96, 2 vols. 4to.1) as a real occurrence which had taken place at Verona, at the beginning of the fourteenth century. Nothing is more natural than the supposition of Eschenburg, by whom this subject has been treated, that the novelists may have borrowed their tale from the historian: yet the exact reverse appears to be the truth, the historian having, in this instance, borrowed of the novelists, though Girolamo declares that he has himself seen the remains of the vault in which the lovers were laid.2 A. W. von Schlegel (Kritische 1 Reprinted at Venice, 4to., 1744. In the fourth volume of the Shakespeare Society's Papers, p. 6, is an account of an Italian poem on the story of Romeo and Juliet, printed at Venice in 1553, which has escaped the commentators. The writer of the paper has given an interesting analysis of this rare work, but does not observe it is Bandello's story, with a few immaterial variations.-ED. "Shake 2 Breval's testimony is curious, though not of much value. speare, as I have found upon a strict search into the histories of Verona, has varied very little either in his names, characters, or other circum Schriften, i., 388) had previously expressed his doubts as to the historical foundation of the story; for Girolamo continued his history of Verona to the year 1560; and the two first parts of Bandello's Tales had appeared at Lucca in 1554, in which edition the story in question is the ninth novel of the second part. Long before Bandello, (1529) Luigi da Porto had told this same story in his single Novella, printed for the first time in 1535, and an earlier historical testimony is no where to be found. Luigi da Porto, in the introduction to his story, quotes, as his authority, the vicá coce information of his archer, a Veronese named Peregrino. He tells us that, having in his youth sojourned some time in Friuli, he was riding in company with two of his people and this archer, from Gradisca to Udino, and being in deep melancholy, arising from an unfortunate attachment, he kept aloof from his companions. The Veronese, a man of fifty, himself a victim to the tender passion, and whose forte consisted in the relation of touching love-stories, noticed this circumstance, and divined his thoughts: whereupon he rode up to him, and, partly to amuse him, partly to warn him of the unhappy consequences of love, told him the story. Luigi's archer gave as his authority a relation of his father's, but doubted the historical truth of the occurrence, because he had read in some old chronicles that the Capelletti and Montecchi had always belonged to the same party. This appears stances, from truth and matter of fact. He observed this rule, indeed, in most of his tragedies, which are so much the more moving, as they are not only grounded upon nature and history, but likewise as he keeps closer to both than any dramatic writer we ever had besides himself.”Breval ap. Upton, ed. 1748, p. 74. Caius Marius.-ED. 1 Who died in the year 1531, 1535, 1539, 1553, and 1731. Italiano, 1754.-ED. Breval reproves Otway, alluding to There are four editions of his book, It is also reprinted in the Novelliero also from the passage of Dante quoted by Schlegel, (Purgatorio, canto vi.) according to which both families were Ghibellines. Dante himself visited Verona shortly after the rule of Bartolomeo de la Scala, and stayed there some time, but mentions neither the story of the two lovers nor the quarrel of their family, though he relates many similar incidents, and had the opportunity of introducing it in the thirteenth canto of the Inferno, where he speaks of those who had committed violence on themselves. The only chronicle of this period which has remained, says as little of these dissensions as those which Luigi's archer professed to have seen. Girolamo de la Corte, on whose historical accuracy Maffei places but little reliance, appears to have made use, therefore, of this story, which two well-known novelists had related before him, only to fill a gap in his History of Verona, which is very obscure at the period of the sway of the house of Scala. According to the account of a still earlier novelist, Masuccio di Salerno, whose Novellino was first printed at Naples in 1476,1 a similar event happened in Sienna. It is true that most of his fifty tales contain real incidents: at least, he declares, at the end of the book, calling God to witness, that all these stories had really happened in his own times. We will here give an abridgment of the tale in question, the agreement of which with that of Romeo and Juliet has been already remarked by Dunlop, in his History of Fiction, p. 255, ed. 1845. In the edition before us, (8vo., Vinegia, 1531) it is the third tale of the fourth book. In Sienna lived a young man of good family, named Mariotto Mignanelli, who was deeply in love with a girl named Gianozza, and had succeeded in engaging her affections. Some impediment, it is not stated what, stood in the way of their public marriage. Having, therefore, no other means of being united, they resolved upon a secret union, and effected this by bribing an Augustine monk, who perReprinted at Venice in 1525.-ED. 1 formed the ceremony. Not long afterwards, Mariotto had the misfortune to kill another citizen of note of Sienna, with whom he had a quarrel. For this he was condemned by the Podesta to perpetual banishment, and obliged to fly to Alexandria, where he had an uncle, one Sir Nicolo Mignanelli, a rich merchant. At his departure, his beloved Gianozza promised to write often to him; and his brother Gargano also promised to give him information respecting her health and circumstances. Shortly afterwards, however, the father of Gianozza found a husband for her, and she was unable to oppose his desire for her marriage, having no reason which she dared allege against it. She pretended, therefore, to consent to the marriage, but endeavoured to escape it by means as daring as they were extraordinary. She bribed the Augustine monk who had married her to prepare a potion which should cast her for three days into a slumber resembling death. She drank it boldly, and was buried in the church of St. Augustine. Before this, she had sent to inform her lover of her purpose, but the messenger was taken by pirates, and never reached him. He received, however, another letter, written by his brother, informing him of the death of his mistress, and of that of her father, who had, indeed, died of grief for the loss of his daughter. Upon this, the unhappy Mariotto resolved to go immediately to Sienna, and either die of grief upon her grave, or suffer himself to be taken by the officers of justice, and end his life by the sentence of the law. He was taken in an attempt to open the vault, and condemned to death. Meanwhile, Gianozza had been taken out of her grave the night after her burial, and, as soon as she came to herself, had set out, dressed in men's clothes, for Alexandria, hoping there to be united to her lover. Here she learns, to her dismay, that Mariotto, at the news of her death, had gone to Sienna, and she resolves immediately to return thither also. She arrives just three days after his execution, and dies of grief, falling on the dead body of her lover. It is easy to see that both stories agree in all their essential points; almost the only variation being that Mariotto chooses a different kind of death from Romeo. Meanwhile, this also is given us as an historical fact, but we are not on that account obliged to give credence to it. It is possible that the two stories may each have happened, the one in Sienna, the other in Verona: similar incidents must always be repeated; for the nature of love is reflected in them; but in all a proof of their historical truth is wanting. It has been attempted to trace this fiction still further. Douce, in his Illustrations of Shakspeare, (ed. 1839, p. 436, cf. Dunlop, p. 35) compares it with the Middle Greek romance of Xenophon Ephesius, and has expressed a belief that Luigi da Porto has availed himself of an extract from it. Anthia, the heroine of this romance, takes a sleeping potion to escape a hated marriage. She is buried, and on waking is carried away by robbers, who had come to plunder the vault of treasure. But Luigi da Porto could scarcely have known this romance. We should rather imagine that the story, of which a single lost trait is found in Xenophon Ephesius, (the same occurring elsewhere, in a similar isolated manner, as, for example, in Cinthio, iii., 5) was already known in the time of the Greek writer. And as Luigi da Groto, surnamed Cieco d'Adria, in his tragedy on this sub 1 Most readers will agree with Dunlop in the opinion that, as the work of Xenophon Ephesius was not published in the lifetime of Luigi da Porto, the resemblance is not sufficiently strong to induce a belief that it was seen by that novelist.-ED. 2 The edition of this play in my possession is entitled "La Hadriana Tragedia di Luigi Groto Cieco d'Hadria, novamente ristampata et ricorretta," Venet., 1612, 12mo. The dedication is dated November 29th, 1578, and in the course of the Prologue the author says "La cui historia, scritta in duri marmi, Ma men duri però della lor fede, A te, che troverai dopò tanti anni |