to Italian and Norman analogues, see Dunlop, History of Fiction, ed. 1845, p. 277; as to other, especially German, traditions of the same kind, see Erich Schmidt's note in Vierteljahrschrift für Litteraturgeschichte, Weimar, 1888, i. 503.) Lillo's play, which at first found little favour, proved more successful in the following season, having been ‘tacked’ by Fielding to his popular ‘Historical Register for 1736,’ and was often repeated (Genest, iii. 489). It was occasionally revived at later dates: on 29 June 1782 at the Haymarket by the elder Colman, whose attention had doubtless been attracted by an appreciative analysis of the play in the ‘Philological Inquiries’ of James Harris (1781), and whose version, slightly altered from the original, was afterwards printed (1783) (Biographia Dramatica). In the following year (10 Feb. 1784) another version of the play, expanded into five acts by Henry Mackenzie, the ‘Man of Feeling,’ was performed at Covent Garden under the title of ‘The Shipwreck’ (Genest, vi. 310). On 1 May 1797 ‘Fatal Curiosity’ was played at Drury Lane for the benefit of Mrs. Siddons, she and John Kemble taking the parts of Agnes and Old Wilmot, and Charles Kemble that of Randal. Finally, Genest (viii. 388) notes a performance of the play at Bath on 13 July 1808, under the title of ‘The Cornish Shipwreck, or Fatal Curiosity,’ in which there was an additional scene, said to be by Lillo, but not printed in any of the extant editions of the play—bringing on the stage Young Wilmot after he has been stabbed by his father—with the result of the performance being stopped by the audience. It should be added that the story of ‘Fatal Curiosity,’ after first suggesting to Karl Philipp Moritz his one-act play, ‘Blunt, oder der Gast,’ Berlin, 1781, and to W. H. Brömet his ‘Stolz und Verzweiflung, Schauspiel in drey Acten,’ Leipzig, 1785, was treated by Zacharias Werner in the far more celebrated tragedy, also in one act, ‘Der vierundzwanzigste Februar,’ acted at Weimar in 1810, and first printed in the journal ‘Urania,’ 1815 (see J. Minor, Introduction to Das Schicksalsdrama, Berlin and Stuttgart, n.d. Some curious particulars about the play are given in Notes and Queries, 6th ser. v. 21–3). It was at the rehearsals for the original production of ‘Fatal Curiosity’ at the Haymarket that Lillo's future editor and biographer, ‘Tom Davies’ [q. v.], who was cast for the part of Young Wilmot, made the acquaintance of the author. He describes Lillo as plain and simple in his address, and at the same time modest, affable, and engaging in conversation. Elsewhere he states him to have been in person lusty, but not tall, and of a pleasing aspect, though deprived of the sight of one eye.
With this second signal effort Lillo's creative vein appears to have exhausted itself. His next play, ‘Marina,’ produced at Covent Garden on 1 Aug. 1738, and acted three times, is an adaptation of ‘Pericles, Prince of Tyre,’ of which, however, the first three acts are omitted (cf. Genest, iii. 561–7). Lillo lived to finish a worthier piece of work, the tragedy of ‘Elmerick, or Justice Triumphant,’ founded on a perversion of an episode of the reign of King Andrew II of Hungary, which he left to the care of his friend John Gray, with a dying request that on publication it should be dedicated to Frederick, prince of Wales. Whether or not through the influence of the prince, whose friend James Hammond [q. v.] interested himself in the play and furnished a prologue and an epilogue, ‘Elmerick’ was produced at Drury Lane on 23 Feb. 1740; on the 26th it was acted for the third time, ‘for the benefit of the author's poor relations, and by command of the Prince and Princess of Wales’ (ib. iii. 607–8). It is, as Genest truly remarks, a good play of its kind—the frigid declamatory—though erring by its vindication of justice through violence. The influence of Hughes's ‘Siege of Damascus’ (1720) is unmistakable. The part of the hero is said to have admirably suited Quin.
If a passage in the prologue to ‘Elmerick’ is to be taken literally, Lillo was at the time of his writing this play
Deprest by want, afflicted by disease;
but in addition to the improbability of the statement, which was doubtless only intended ad captandum, Davies had it on the authority of a former partner in Lillo's business that he died in very easy circumstances, and left the bulk of his fortune, which included an estate of 60l. per annum, to his nephew, John Underwood. This was confirmed by Lillo's will, which was shown to his biographer by the son of his nephew, likewise a city jeweller. Davies had moreover heard that by his plays Lillo had in the course of seven years accumulated not much less than 800l. He died on 3 Sept. 1739, and was buried in the vault of St. Leonard's, Shoreditch (Gent. Mag. 1739, p. 496; ‘Cibber,’ Life).
Lillo left behind him an unfinished adaptation of the powerful Elizabethan ‘domestic tragedy,’ ‘Arden of Feversham,’ which, according to Roberts, an actor well acquainted with him, was put together as early as 1736 (Davies, i. 36), and was revised or completed after Lillo's death by Dr. John Hoadly,
