We need not hesitate in stating that the third and fourth dramas in the present volume were "publicly played," and the title-page of one of them states the fact. Moreover, they were the authorship of a most distinguished individual, perhaps only second to Tarlton as an actor, and decidedly his superior as an author. Nothing that has come down to us leads us to suppose, that Tarlton had much beyond his lavish extemporal wit and broad drollery to recommend him; for although various productions were attributed to him, such as are extant do not warrant an opinion that, as a writer, he had much originality.[8] The reverse is the case with Robert Wilson, whose initials are on the title-pages of "The three Ladies of London," and of "The three Lords and three Ladies of London," and who, besides his well-attested talents as a public performer, was indisputably a dramatist of great ability. He, too, was famous for his extreme readiness of reply, when suddenly called upon; but we cannot help suspecting that some confusion has arisen between the Robert Wilson, the writer of the two dramas above-named (as well as of "The Cobbler's Prophecy," 1594, a production of a similar character), and the Robert Wilson who is mentioned in "Henslowe's Diary," and whom Meres, as late as 1598, calls "our worthy Wilson," adding that he was "for learning and extemporal wit, without compare or compeer."[9] The younger Robert Wilson was, perhaps, the son of the elder; but without here entering into the evidence on the point (with which we were not formerly so well-acquainted), we may state our persuasion generally, that the Robert Wilson who was appointed one of the leaders of one of Queen Elizabeth's two companies of players in 1583,[10] was not the same Robert Wilson who was a joint-author, with Munday, Drayton, and Hathway, in the drama on the story of Sir John Oldcastle, imputed to Shakespeare on the authority of some copies printed in 1600.
There are two old editions of "The three Ladies of London," one of them printed in 1584, the text of which we have followed, and the other in 1592, the various readings of which we have noted. Both of them have the initials R.W. on the title-page as those of the writer; but some doubt has been thrown upon the question of authorship, because, at the end of the piece, in both impressions, we read "Finis. Paul Bucke." The fact, however, no doubt is that Paul Bucke who, it has been recently ascertained, was an actor,[11] subscribed the transcript, which about 1584 he had procured for Roger Ward the printer, in order to authenticate it: hence the connection of his name with the production, in the performance of which he may also have had a share, and he may thus have had access to the prompter's book. The Paul Bucke, who in 1578 was the author of a "prayer for Sir Humphrey Gilbert," was in all probability the same individual.[12]