stage with movement. Historical plays might, indeed,
draw from classical history or from current foreign history, but from
1590 to 1603 a very large number of plays give scenic representation to
the reigns of English kings.

Some of these form a distinct class, since, however mixed with comic
matter, they imitate Kyd or Marlowe and recast the chronicle of a reign
to fit the accepted subjects of tragedy, the downfall of a prince, the
revenge for a crime, the overthrow of a tyrant, or the retribution
brought upon a conspirator or usurper. Conceived under Marlowe's
influence, and perhaps owing something to his hand, is the tetralogy
that includes the three parts of _Henry VI_ and _Richard III_.

Those history plays, however, that do not follow the formulas for
tragedy, are a heterogeneous group not easily classified. They usually
keep to the loose chronicle method that presented a series of scenes
without much regard to unity or coherence. Farce, comedy, magic,
spectacle, heroics, and everything that might have happened was
permissible in these plays, and perhaps the only thing indispensable was
a pitched field with opposing armies. Biographical, comic, popular,
patriotic, or what not, these plays brought a variety of scenes to the
theaters, but offered only a loose and flexible form rather than any
dramatic direction or model to the creator of Falstaff.

The early deaths of Greene and Marlowe and the retirement of Lyly left
Shakespeare the heir of their inventions. Though his plays were at first
imitative, he soon surpassed his predecessors in gift of expression, in
depiction of character, and in deftness of dramatic technic. The years
from 1593 to near the turn of the century are particularly lacking in
records of plays or theaters; but it seems clear that the main
developments of the drama were in romantic comedy and chronicle history;
and it is also clear that Shakespeare was the unquestioned leader in
both of these forms.

[Page Heading: Shakespeare's Leadership]

In comparison with his associates, he was now the master, relying on his
own experience rather than on their innovations. Neither the crude but
popular _Mucedorus_ (1595) nor Dekker's poetical extravagance, _Old
Fortunatus_ (1596), could contribute to his development of romantic
comedy; and domestic comedy could not instruct the inventor of Launce
and Launcelot. Incidental relationships may indeed be noted. _As You
Like It_, for example, dramatizes a pa