Legend." Uhland shows heaviness in conception, and a conventionality,
thoroughly at variance with the tragedy's original passion. Romantic
as he is, he has robbed the story of its warm southern nature, and has
thrown his Dante aside to deal with false situation. He seems willing
to let fact and spirit go. _Paolo_ is a knight who tilts and worships
a glove. Uhland thinks, and he is not alone in his belief, that
_Francesca_ had been promised to _Paolo_ before _Giovanni_ was wedded
to her; yet if _Paolo's_ marriage with _Orabile_, in 1269, is to be
recognized as correct, historically, logical deductions from dates
would discountenance the statement. Neither have I found commentaries
to support the theory that _Paolo_ was older than _Giovanni_, as
Uhland sets forth in his play. The servant in Boccaccio here becomes
a jealous lover. It is interesting to note the variations of this
counter-element in the many play versions of the story--the element
that urges _Giovanni's_ suspicion to quick action--the dramatic force
of _Pepe_ in Boker; the disappointed motherhood and embittered love of
_Lucrezia_ in Stephen Phillips; the inborn savagery of _Malatestino_
in D'Annunzio; the innocent unconsciousness of _Concordia_ in
Crawford, which finds similarity in a scene in Maeterlinck's "Pelléas
and Mélisande" between father and little son. Further, in Uhland,
a distorted glimpse of a colourless reportorial figure of Dante,
gathering material for his poem, is as meaningless as it is
unnecessary for atmosphere.

Stephen Phillips, in his Francesca drama, ignores altogether Italian
temperament; save for the fact that he occasionally mentions the
Tyrant of Rimini, Pesaro and Florence, and that he adheres to historic
names, there is more of the English hamlet romance in the piece, than
Italian passion. And that cannot be said of Shakespeare's "Romeo and
Juliet." Perhaps one may claim for Phillips some of the simplicity of