VVERE we not restricted by the plan of the present edition of Shakspere from offering more than a summary of the merits of each play, with such observations as its history may render necessary, we should yet refrain from entering at much length into the controversy to which this and the two following plays have given rise. Still, Malone's dissertation, in which he endeavours to convince his reader and himself, that the First Part of "HENRY VI." owes not a word to Shakspere, and that the Second and Third Parts are merely mended by his hand, must not be passed over in entire silence. He grounds his belief, that the First Part was entirely the work of an earlier dramatist, mainly on the circumstance, that there is an unusual amount of mythological allusion in it; more, as he conjectures, than Shakspere had, at the time, to bestow; and that the metre is differently constructed from his later plays. No conclusion, however, against the genuineness of the present play can fairly be drawn from the affluence of mythological or classical allusion contained in it, or from the construction of its metre. Whoever the author, this play was undoubtedly written when Shakspere was a very young man. Supposing it to be his, what more likely than that a youthful poet should be anxious to shew his acquirements (witness the pedantry of his early comedy "LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST"), or that he should have adopted a structure of verse which Marlow had made so smooth and musical, that his must be a practised ear which can at last detect its monotony and be weary of its sweetness? Upon the whole, we incline to think that the three plays of "KING HENRY VI." were constructed by one man, and that that man was Shakspere; but that, if he were not the author, he put his mending hand to all three. In the present play, Joan of Arc, speaking of her sword, says "The which, at Touraine, in St. Katharine's churchyard, Out of a great deal of old iron, I chose forth." Who would not wish to know that Shakspere never wrote so poorly? But when she says, shortly afterwards— "Glory is like a circle in the water, Which never ceases to enlarge itself, Till, by broad spreading, it disperse to nought:" Who can readily believe that any other but Shakspere produced so exquisite an illustration? An old writer, denouncing ambition, compares it to the crocodile, which, he says, continues to grow during its whole existence. This will apply as closely to genius, and eminently so to the genius of Shakspere. How much greater are his mature than his early productions! Let us grant that the present and the two succeeding plays are from his hand. This is to be borne in mind—a young author, diffident, perhaps, of his abilities (certainly unacquainted with their extent), anxious to please, observant of the success of others; he could scarce do aught else than cast an historical play in the mould that was familiar to his audience. Marlow, Peele, and Greene had preceded him; men not lightly esteemed: let us add, not undeservedly famous: held, we doubt not (the first especially), in veneration by the young Shakspere. What was he to do?-the not unknowing but the unlearned youth; he, who came out of no university, as the rest had done-what could he do, but follow in their steps? Time, which brought experience; experience which ripened judgment; these were present, and lent their aid at the composition of the master's plays. After enjoying the great historical productions of Shakspere, printed, as they are, in chronological order, we can conceive and sympathise with the disappointment of the reader, when he lights, for the first time, upon the following play. He will see that it is full of action, but deficient in character; that, with the exception of the Bishop of Winchester and the young King, it scarcely aims at individual portraiture. The rest of the personages are alike prominent; distinguished by their names, but not otherwise discriminated. The whole reminds us of an ancient print, without light or shade or perspective, in which the figures are all more or less alike, yet not one like the person designed to be represented, save that, in common with its original, it possesses all the members of a human body. No edition of this play is known prior to that of the first folio. PERSONS REPRESENTED. KING HENRY THE SIXTH. DUKE OF GLOSTER, Uncle to the KINO, and Protector. DUKE OF BEDFORD, Uncle to the KINO, and Regent of France THOMAS BEAUFORT, Duke of Fxeter, great Uncle to the KING HENRY BEAUFORT, great Uncle to the KING, Bishop of Win chester and afterwards Cardinal. JOHN BEAUFORT, Earl of Somerset, afterwards Duke. RICHARD PLANTAGENET, eldest Son of Richard late Earl of Cambridge, afterwards Duke of York EARL OF WARWICK. EARL OF SALISBURY EARL OF SUFFOLK. LORD TALBOT; afterwards Earl of Shrewsbury. JOHN TALBOT, his Son. EDMUND MORTIMER, Earl of March. Mortimers Keeper, and a Lawyer. SIR JOHN FASTOI FE. SIR WILLIAM LUCY. SIR WILLIAM GLANSDALE. SIR THOMAS GARGRAVE. Mayor of London. WOODVILLE, Lieutenant of the Tower. VERNON, of the White Rose, or York Faction. BASSET. of the Red Rose, or Lancaster Faction. CHARLES, Dauphin, and afterwards King of France. REIGNIER Duke of Anjou, and titular King of Naples DUKE OF BURGUNDY. DUKE OF ALENCON. Governor of Paris. BASTARD OF ORLEANS. Master Gunner of Orleans, and his Son. General of the French Forces in Bordeaux. A French Sergeant. A Porter. An old Shepherd, Father to JOAN LA PUCELLR MARGARET, Daughter to REIGNIER; afterwards married to KING HENKY. COUNTESS OF AUVERGNE. JOAN LA PUCELLE, commonly called JOAN OF ARO. Fiends appearing to LA PUCELIB, Lords, Warders of the Tower, Heralds, Officers, Soldiers, Messengers, and several Attendants, both on the Euglish and French. SCENE. Partly in ENGLAND, and partly in FRANCE His sparkling eyes, replete with wrathful fire, Exe. We mourn in black: why mourn we not in blood? Henry is dead, and never shall revive: Upon a wooden coffin we attend; Win. He was a king blessed of the King of kings. Unto the French the dreadful judgment day men prayed, His thread of life had not so soon decayed. And lookest to command the prince and realm. And ne'er throughout the year to church thou go'st, Except it be to pray against thy foes. Bed. Cease, cease these jars, and rest your Let's to the altar :-Heralds, wait on us :--- When at their mothers' moist eyes babes shall suck; Our isle be made a nourish of salt tears, Enter a Messenger. Mess. My honourable lords, health to you all! Sad tidings bring I to you out of France, Of loss, of slaughter, and discomfiture: Speak softly, or the loss of those great towns death. Glo. Is Paris lost? is Rouen yielded up? If Henry were recalled to life again, These news would cause him once more yield the ghost. Exe. How were they lost; what treachery was used? Mess. No treachery; but want of men and money. : Among the soldiers this is muttered :- You are disputing of your generals. One would have lingering wars, with little cost; Exe. Were our tears wanting to this funeral, These tidings would call forth her flowing tides. Bed. Me they concern: regent I am of France: Give me my steeléd coat, I'll fight for France. Away with these disgraceful wailing robes! Wounds I will lend the French, instead of eyes, To weep their intermissive miseries. |