See Gentleman's Magazine, January 1855; and Records of a Girlhood, by his daughter Frances Ann Kemble, who has achieved distinction both as a tragedienne and an authoress.

KEMBLE, John Mitchell (1807-1857), Anglo-Saxon scholar and historian, eldest son of Charles Kemble noticed above, was born in 1807. He received his education partly from Dr Richardson, author of the Dictionary of the English Langτιage, and partly at the grammar school of Bury St Edmunds, where he obtained in 1826 an exhibition to Trinity College, Cambridge. At school he was distinguished for his miscellaneous knowledge, and at the university his essays on historical subjects gained him high reputation. The historical bent of his studies was confirmed and turned more especially towards the Anglo-Saxon period through the influence of the brothers Grimm, under whom he studied at Göttingen. His thorough knowledge of the Teutonic speeches was shown in his Beowulf (1833-37), Ceber die Stammtafel der Westsachsen (1836), Codex Diplomaticus Aevi Saxoηici (1839), and in many contributions to reviews; while his History of the Saxons in England (1849) was the first attempt at a thorough examination of the original sources of the early period of English history. He was also for some time editor of the Foreign Quarterly Review. In 1857 he published State Papers and Correspondence illustrative of the Social and Political State of Europe from the Revolution to the Accession of the House of Hanover. He died at Dublin 26th March 1857. His Horse Ferales, ar Studies in the Archaeology of Northern Nations, was completed by Dr Latham, and published in 1864.

KEMBLE, John Philip (1757-1823), tragedian, was the second child of Roger Kemble, a strolling player, and his wife Sarah Ward, the eldest child being Sarah, known as Mrs Siddons. He was born at Prescot, Lancashire, February 1, 1757. In his eleventh year he became an inmate of Sedgely Park Catholic seminary, near Wolverhampton, and after remaining there four years entered the college of Douai with the view of becoming a priest. At the conclusion of the course, however, he discovered that he had no vocation for the priesthood, and, arriving in England in the end of 1775, he joined the theatrical company of Crump and Chamberlain, his first appearance being in the character of Theodosius at Wolverhampton, 8th January 1776. Various stories more or less apocryphal are told of his early hardships, until in 1778 he joined the York company of Wilkinson, where he appeared in Hamlet and other leading parts, besides contributing a drama of his own on the subject of Belisarius. In 1781 he made a decided step in advance, obtaining a “star” engagement in Smock Alley Theatre, Dublin, and achieved astonishing success in the Count of Narbonne by Captain Jephson. Gradually he won for himself a high reputation as a careful and finished actor, and this, combined with the greater fame of his sister Mrs Siddons, led to an engagement in Drury Lane Theatre, where he made his debut 30th September 1783, in the part of Hamlet. His appearance was successful, but rather by awakening interest and discussion than enthusiastic approval. His reading of the part, though highly intellectual and elaborated with the most minute care, was stiff and laboured, especially until he acquired the familiarity with the personation obtainable by repetition. In Edward the Black Prince, Richard III., King John, Sir Giles Overreach, and other characters he did not materially advance his reputation. His first decided success was in the character of Macbeth for his own benefit, when he shared in the enthusiasm aroused by Mrs Siddons, and established for himself a reputation among living actors second to hers only. In December 1787 he married Mrs Brereton, the widow of a young actor. His appointment as manager of the theatre in October of the following year gave him full opportunity to experiment with whatever parts might strike his fancy, and of this he took advantage with greater courage than discretion. His smile, as was wittily said, “resembled the plating on a coffin,” and it was only in cases where his gravity gave a certain piquancy to the character that his comedy parts were redeemed from failure, notwithstanding his clever mastery of smart repartee. In Coriolanus, however, which was revived during his first season, the character of the “noble Roman” was so exactly suited to his powers that he not only played it with a perfection that has never been approached, but, it is said, unconsciously allowed its influence to colour his private manner and modes of speech. His tall and imposing person, noble countenance, and solemn and grave demeanour were uniquely adapted for the Roman characters in Shakespeare’s plays; and, when in addition he had to depict the gradual growth and development of one absorbing passion, his representation gathered a momentum and majestic force that were irresistible. His defect was in flexibility, variety, rapidity; the characteristic of his style was method, regularity, precision, elaboration even of the minutest details, founded on a thorough psychological study of the special personality he had to represent. His elocutionary art, lus fine sense of rhythm and emphasis, enabled him to excel in declamation, but physically he was incapable of giving expression to impetuous vehemence and searching pathos. In Coriolanus and Cato he was beyond praise, and possibly he may have been superior to both Garrick and Kean in Macbeth, although it must be remembered that in it part of his inspiration must have been caught from Mrs Siddons. In all the other great Shakespearean characters he was, according to the best critics, inferior to them, least so in Lear and Hamlet, and most so in Shy lock and Richard III. On account of the eccentricities of Sheridan, the proprietor of Drury Lane Theatre, Kemble withdrew from the management, and, although he resumed his duties at the beginning of the season 1800-1, he at the close of 1802 finally resigned connexion with it. In 1803 he became manager of Covent Garden, of which he was also part proprietor. The theatre was burned down in 1808, and the raising of the prices after the opening of the new theatre in 1809 led to a persevering succession of riots, which practically suspended the performances for three months. Kemble took his final leave of the stage in the part of Coriolanus, June 23, 1817, his retirement being probably hastened by the increasing popularity of Kean. The remaining years of his life were spent chiefly abroad, first at Toulouse, and after a short stay in London at Lausanne, where he died February 20, 1823.

See Boaden’s Life of John Philip Kemble, 1825; Fitzgerald, The Kembles, 1871.