which Henry bestowed upon Catherine, but time and place are mis-stated. It was given in the first interview at Meulan, and not in the presence of one lady in waiting only (as in Shakspeare), but before the two assembled courts; so publicly, indeed, as to cause her to blush deeply, and to be handed to her tent by the Duke of Burgundy.* "Uncle Exeter," † whom Shakspeare makes withdraw to negotiate with the French king, was in fact sent to him at Troyes, in company with the young Duke of Burgundy. At Troyes there was a meeting of all parties, being the second of the two which Shakspeare confounds; here the treaty was concluded, by which Henry was to succeed to the crown of France, after the death of Charles the Sixth, and the marriage was celebrated in June 1420.‡ many This play (says Johnson) has many scenes of high dignity, and of easy merriment. The character of the king is well supported, except in his courtship, where he has neither the vivacity of Hal, nor the grandeur of Henry. The lines given to the * Elm. 222; Monst. ii. 230. Tyler gives a full account of the meeting at Meulan, but no authority. See Sismondi, xii. 572. + Exeter is named by Holinshed (113) as well as Shakspeare, but his companions are different. Sismondi, xii. 597; Elmham, 266; Monst., 277. chorus have many admirers, but the truth is, that, in them, a little may be praised, and much must be forgiven. The great defect of this play is the emptiness and narrowness of the last act, which a very little diligence might have easily avoided." The remarks upon Henry are just, including the condemnation of the courtship scenes, which, as being imaginary, and not well imagined, I have not noticed. Henry the Fifth is justly painted as a brave and generous man, affable and of popular manners; though Sismondi deems otherwise of him, chiefly because he was peremptory in his language to the politic and shifty Duke of Burgundy.* But Johnson scarcely does justice to the chorus. Of the introduction to the fourth act, Tom Campbell says, "The description of the night before the battle of Agincourt will be repeated by the youth of England, when our children's children shall be grey with age." I am afraid that my truly poetical friend describes what ought to be, not what is or will be. Sismondi, xii. 572. 212 HENRY VI.-PART I. I Now come to the worst of the historical plays, the three parts of Henry the Sixth. It has been doubted whether Shakspeare wrote any one of these, and it was the decided opinion of Malone and Farmer, from which, however, Steevens and Johnson dissented, that he did not write, or even re-model and adopt, the first part. I will not undertake to decide between these two pairs of critics; nor indeed have I looked sufficiently into the evidence to justify a strong opinion. I am afraid that a play may contain a great deal that is bad, and still be the work of our poet; but, whether five acts of diversified writing, with scarcely one passage of eminent merit, can be Shakspeare's work, is more doubtful. I attach considerable importance to Malone's remark* upon the dissimilar versification of this piece from that of the undoubted plays. Of this first play, the rhythm is neither appropriate nor agreeable. * Bosw., xviii. 4; and 560. On historical inaccuracies or contradictions no stress is to be laid. I am surprised that Malone, who has detected so many mistakes, should think it improbable that Shakspeare should in such matters be inconsistent with himself. As to the poet's carelessness, I do not think that Dr. Johnson overrates it. I am afraid that the defects of the play must necessarily affect my commentary; and I really cannot find one good passage to relieve the unavoidable dulness of minute criticism. Since, however, these plays are included in all editions of Shakspeare's works, and are read with the rest, by the youth of England, and I presume of Germany, it is equally my business to examine them, whether he wrote them or not. And let it not be supposed that I decide the question when I speak of the author as Shakspeare. The First Part of Henry the Sixth opens with the corpse of Henry the Fifth lying in state in Westminster Abbey, surrounded by the Dukes of Bedford, Gloucester, and Exeter; the Earl of Warwick, and the Bishop of Winchester, well known as Cardinal Beaufort.+ * The dramatis personæ contains only one Earl of Warwick; but this Warwick is the Beauchamp of the former plays; whereas he who takes a more prominent part presently is the successor, Neville, who became earl in 1439. It can hardly be necessary to say that Henry Beaufort Henry died in France on the 31st of August, 1422; and was buried in Westminster Abbey, with great pomp; and, doubtless, amidst the lamentations of his nobles and people. But Shakspeare would have done much better had he versified the panegyric of Holinshed, instead of giving such lines as these :— "Gloucester. England ne'er had a king until his time. Virtue he had, deserving to command; His brandish'd sword did blind men with his beams; Than mid-day sun, fierce bent against their faces." How much better is this: 66 This Henry was a king, of life without spot; a prince whom all men loved, and of none disdained; a captain against whom fortune never frowned, nor mischance once spurned; whose people, him so severe a justicer, both loved and obeyed; and so humane withal, that he left no offence unpunished, nor friendship unrewarded; a terror to rebels, and suppresser of sedition, his virtues notable, his qualities most praiseworthy. 66 'In strength and nimbleness of body, from his was one of the sons of John of Gaunt, by Catharine Swinford, legitimated (except as to the crown) by Act of parliament. Thomas, Duke of Exeter, was another; they were great uncles to the king. A |