s in bearskins and wooden-sworded vices that
create true comedy; they belong to the realm of farce. Yet they
continued to flourish long after Heywood had set another example, and
with them the cuffing of ears and drunken gambolling which we may see,
in the works of other men, trying to rescue prosy scenes from dullness.
In _Johan Johan_ is simple comedy, the comedy of laughter-raising
dialogue and 'asides'. We do not say it is perfect comedy, far from it;
but it is comedy cleared of its former alloys. It is the comedy which
Shakespeare refined for his own use in _Twelfth Night_ and elsewhere.

[Footnote 34: Translation by W.C. Robinson, Ph.D. (Bohn's Standard
Library).]

[Footnote 35: aright.]

[Footnote 36: world's.]

[Footnote 37: company.]

[Footnote 38: wealth.]

[Footnote 39: know.]

[Footnote 40: know not.]

[Footnote 41: solace.]

[Footnote 42: stealing.]

[Footnote 43: lying.]

[Footnote 44: fright.]

[Footnote 45: glad.]

[Footnote 46: alehouse sign.]

[Footnote 47: The reader is warned against chronological confusion. In
order to follow out the various dramatic contributions of the Interludes
one must sometimes pass over plays at one point to return to them at
another. Care has been taken to place approximate dates against the
plays, and these should be duly regarded. The treatment of so early an
Interlude writer as Heywood (his three best known productions may be
dated between 1520 and 1540) thus late is justified by the fact that he
is in some ways 'before his time', notably in his rejection of the
Morality abstractions.]

[Footnote 48: sweet.]

CHAPTER IV

RISE OF COMEDY AND TRAGEDY

No great discernment is required to see that, after the appearance of
_Johan Johan_, all that was needed for the complete development of
comedy was the invention of a well-contrived plot. For reasons already
indicated, Interludes were naturally deficient in this respect. Nor were
the Moralities and Bible Miracles much better: their length and
comprehensive themes were against them. There were the Saint Plays, of
which some still lingered upon the stage; these offered greater
possibilities. But here, again, originality was limited; the
_denouement_ was more or less a foregone conclusion. Clearly, one of two
things was wanted: either a man of genius to perceive the need and to
supply it, or the study of new models outside the field of English
drama. The man of genius was not then forthcoming, bu