29.03.2013 Views

Literature, Principally Belletristic - University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Literature, Principally Belletristic - University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Literature, Principally Belletristic - University of Tennessee, Knoxville

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

· <strong>Literature</strong>, <strong>Principally</strong> <strong>Belletristic</strong> .<br />

markedly colonial, and the butts <strong>of</strong> his satire are, like those <strong>of</strong> Samuel<br />

Butler in Hudibras, the Puritans who lived around him, in his case significantly<br />

the American variety. He had already participated in the Maryland<br />

Proprietary-Puritan pamphlet warfare <strong>of</strong> the r650s when he came to<br />

write this history-description promotion piece, by which he is best remembered.<br />

His earlier Hammond vs Heamans (London, [r655}) is one <strong>of</strong><br />

the most effective vitriolic partisan tracts <strong>of</strong> seventeenth-century America,<br />

and its effectiveness may have inspired him to write the milder and quite<br />

different though kindred Leah and Rachel.<br />

Leah and Rachel is genuinely American, Moses Coit Tyler and others<br />

have thought, because <strong>of</strong> its colloquialisms and specifically American subject<br />

matter and presentation <strong>of</strong> peculiarly colonial problems and situations.<br />

The butts <strong>of</strong> Hammond's ridicule are earlier "lying" pamphleteers on the<br />

Chesapeake colony such as William Bullock (r649 ), the roaring tavern<br />

frequenters among the dissolute clergy from England who were compelled<br />

to depart, the London human beasts <strong>of</strong> burden too timid or stupid<br />

to attempt a better living in America, and <strong>of</strong> course the Chesapeake<br />

Puritan communities and individuals. But the satiric quality should not<br />

be overstressed, for Hammond's general tone is optimistic and goodnatured.64<br />

Seventeenth-century Maryland, and southern colonial writing for that<br />

matter, is well represented, possibly best represented, in George Alsop's A<br />

Character <strong>of</strong> the Province <strong>of</strong> Mary-Land (London, r666), some <strong>of</strong> the<br />

serious verses from which have been noted above. Though allegedly intended<br />

like Hammond's book as promotion, its tone and impression are<br />

those <strong>of</strong> an exercise in wit and satire, in both its prose and its verse. Its<br />

language is not nearly so plain as Hammond's. In fact, Alsop's style is<br />

baroque or euphuistic, a belated example <strong>of</strong> a popular Jacobean form<br />

<strong>of</strong> writing from the earlier seventeenth century. But with the elaborate low<br />

style <strong>of</strong> Thomas Nashe <strong>of</strong> an earlier period are combined Restoration<br />

frankness about sex, and an elaborate word-play in puns, colloquialisms,<br />

and folk sayings that might have had earlier or contemporary models.<br />

The London-born Alsop had served an apprenticeship in England and<br />

a four-years indenture in Maryland (probably as a clerk) before he returned<br />

to Great Britain and wrote ostensibly at Lord Baltimore's request<br />

this piece aimed to support the Proprietorship. Even more than Hammond,<br />

Alsop was an ardent royalist, and like Hammond he was an<br />

orthodox Anglican. Alsop was a free man by r662 and was still in Maryland<br />

in 1663 and probably in r664. A Character is certainly the most curious<br />

and delightful <strong>of</strong> all seventeenth-century promotion tracts. He called<br />

it "A Character" surely in the contemporary sense <strong>of</strong> the verbal portrait,<br />

or abstract character sketch, normally satiric (see the later William Byrd<br />

r349

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!